Our interview
Well, most limiters now is just padded second ADC channel. :-)
New firmware - v5.0
This update will add some key functionality found in the new F8n.
- Advanced Look-Ahead Hybrid Limiters
- Zoom AutoMix™ function
- Improved TC accuracy when powered off
- Digital Boost for headphone monitor (up to +24dB)
- Selectable headphone Volume Curve
- New "Fader Mode" view for home screen
- Maximum fader level increased from +12dB to +24dB
- F8 Control iOS app can now work together with FRC-8
- Ability to record to SD card and USB Audio Interface simultaneously
Such sorting is not made by actual sales number, but on how marketing want you to think it is.
Zoom F8 Multi-Track Field Recorder for $749
Zoom F8 vs Sound Devices MixPre-3 Recording Samples
Crazily there is only a hundred dollar difference now between the MixPre3 and the F8!! :-o
Yet astonishingly the MixPre3 seems to significantly outsell the F8 on B&H?! :-/
http://ironfilm.co.nz/most-popular-sound-recorders-on-bh-in-2018/
Zoom F8 Multi-Track Field Recorder for $749
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1140426-REG/zoom_zf8_f8_field_recorder.html
Interesting human forum behaviour:
https://www.videomaker.com/forum/topic/zoom-f8-setup-and-use-in-the-field
The things you find when researching a product! Gosh.
Very cool kit
Sennheiser MKH 416 Short Shotgun Interference Tube Microphone with Zoom F8 Multi-Track Recorder Kit for $1499
@soundgh2 I work mainly for dance, since 3 years I use the Tascam DR-680 and yes, I need 6 entries (sometime I need 8) : 2 output from sound desk (sometime 4), 2 from ORTF couple front stage and sometime 2 HF for voices. I can say I really NEED those input. Definitely less good than an old Nagra IV but cheaper, lighter and easier to use… Good old days are passing. Jacques Hoepffner
As a dubbing mixer and previously a location mixer - these ISO recorders (as luxurious as they seem) can be a pain in the arse in the mix sometimes, and reduce the skill required for capturing on set - I had 2 channels as a boom op and recordist and never had a problem in the most complex of setups - post cost and time >> than to do it right at source. How many channels do you need these days lol And I must say quality of location sound is so much worse than several years ago - hey ho get paid by the hour shouldn't complain! But polishing turds doesn't fill me with joy, I'd rather be mixing.
Sound Devices 688 sample - https://soundcloud.com/bhproaudio/sounddevices-688
Zoom F8 sample - https://soundcloud.com/bhproaudio/zoomf8
All they needed to do to make it perfect was add digital i/o, marginally better preamps and a bay for a Sony camcorder battery and it would be the best box in town. And how much would that cost, $10 per unit?
It's also nice that it offers tone and a slate mic as well as master timecode. Three important things that a DR 680 doesn't have. It's hard to pay a grand to upgrade when I already have a suitable system (and hire a sound guy with gear for bigger shoots) but if I were starting out fresh right now, it would be a no-brainer.
I would pay $500 for it, but not more. Well, maybe $550 :)
An ein figure of 127 dB reflects poor design. OTOH, most people like the sound so far, and that's worth more than numbers. No question level pots is a big deal in the field, although I got used to the system on the 680 it is a pain.
Another review of the F8 with pics of it showing a couple of other common ones so you can see its relative size: http://www.lightformfilm.com/blog/zoom-f8-impressions/
I have a DR 680 that I like a lot. However, I can see some things in the Zoom F8 that would be a lot more convenient operationally on a film shoot. For example, having a dedicated level pot on each channel instead of having to trim all the channels by quicking switching to that channel with a button press and then using the single trim pot on the DR 680. The Zoom seems like it has the little improvements that can mean a lot more than the strict numbers.
I find that the difference between usable pro gear and cheap stuff is often reliability and easy operation.
All because Zoom didn't spend $10 for a digital input or spend $2 for a quiet preamp chip & design.
Most fun thing is that still good solid state preamps for recorders are considered something like magic :-).
@ironfilm Take a decent preamp with digital out--they are cheap these days--and use that as the main pair for your mix going digital into the Tascam. The Zoom has a claimed noise figure of -127. Plug a minus 129.5 pre in, and, voila, the main pair, which should be most of the mix--has a lower noise floor than the the Zoom can ever manage. All because Zoom didn't spend $10 for a digital input or spend $2 for a quiet preamp chip & design.
It's a bit of a moot point since the ambient noise will be higher than the Tascam or the Zoom anyway, but it was a brilliant move from Tascam to allow an external, high-end pre.
If you have good preamp with digital output :-) And for most usage Tascam 680 is more than enough.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!