15 replies to this topic

[miller4505]

I need a new digital recorder for doing evp's just wonder what one is better for evp's the "Zoom H4n" or the "RT-EVP"

Thanks

[CaveRat2]

The H4 would be your best choice.

The other one while having decent specs also has a lot of junk on it that is likely to cause false positives and other anomalies. You will also get better noise specs on the H4, the quality of the circuitry is better. The RT-EVP is a gimmick, made simply to take advantage of the "Ghost Hunter" market and those who will buy something just because it says it's for ghost hunters. The H4 is a general purpose digital recorder intended for those looking for a decent quality digital recorder. It may not be the best available, but is certainly a step up from a voice recorder, and much better than the RT-EVP

[miller4505]

CaveRat, on Sep 21 2010, 10:45 AM, said:

The H4 would be your best choice.

The other one while having decent specs also has a lot of junk on it that is likely to cause false positives and other anomalies. You will also get better noise specs on the H4, the quality of the circuitry is better. The RT-EVP is a gimmick, made simply to take advantage of the "Ghost Hunter" market and those who will buy something just because it says it's for ghost hunters. The H4 is a general purpose digital recorder intended for those looking for a decent quality digital recorder. It may not be the best available, but is certainly a step up from a voice recorder, and much better than the RT-EVP

Thank you for the help I'm definitely going to get the Zoom H4n, also do you know if you can have live playback as your recording with the Zoom H4n?

[miller4505]

I was also looking at the Roland Edirol R-09HR

[CaveRat2]

I am not sure about real time monitoring on the H4, I haven't tested that one in the lab. Actually I take a slightly different approach to EVPs. I use a high gain amplifier with a sensor or mic input and headphone output. I concentrate on simply hearing them in realtime. The recorder is sort of an add-on, it simply records what is fed to my headphones for later analysis. The end result is the same, a recording is made of any EVP, but the emphasis is on communication in realtime instead of simply recording.

BTW, I use a TASCAM multitrack cassette system (analog) or a Fostex FR2 (digital) when recording. Mixing and amplification is done with a EVamP2 system using low impedence, balanced inputs and voice band preemphasis filtering ahead of the recorder.

[miller4505]

CaveRat, on Sep 21 2010, 09:10 PM, said:

I am not sure about real time monitoring on the H4, I haven't tested that one in the lab. Actually I take a slightly different approach to EVPs. I use a high gain amplifier with a sensor or mic input and headphone output. I concentrate on simply hearing them in realtime. The recorder is sort of an add-on, it simply records what is fed to my headphones for later analysis. The end result is the same, a recording is made of any EVP, but the emphasis is on communication in realtime instead of simply recording.

BTW, I use a TASCAM multitrack cassette system (analog) or a Fostex FR2 (digital) when recording. Mixing and amplification is done with a EVamP2 system using low impedence, balanced inputs and voice band preemphasis filtering ahead of the recorder.

Thanks for all the help, I can only afford to spend $300 to start with.

[ourobouros2k2]

I would also recommend the H4n over the RT-EVP. I don't have any experience with the RT-EVP, but I do have with zoom products and they are very good. Ultimately I think you will like it better, plus the dual phantom power XLR inputs would let you really enjoy a set of R0de NT-1A's for one of the lowest system noise floors you could ever hope for.

If you want to save a few bucks, I HIGHLY recommend the Sony PCM-M10 recorder (199 when you add-to-cart and B and H photo). The onboard mic's are the best I have ever heard for an onboard soloution (Primo em-172's with only 14db self noise). Hard to beat for that quality, and impossible to beat at the price. It will outperform the internals on a zoom h4n based off self-noise alone. Featurewise, though, the Zoom is still the way to go.

Either way, you are on the right track with an LPCM recorder. I have been preaching the gospel of higher quality audio for a bit now, and I promise that once you try it, you will never want to go back.

best regards,
Andy

[miller4505]

ourobouros2k2, on Sep 22 2010, 03:59 PM, said:

I would also recommend the H4n over the RT-EVP. I don't have any experience with the RT-EVP, but I do have with zoom products and they are very good. Ultimately I think you will like it better, plus the dual phantom power XLR inputs would let you really enjoy a set of R0de NT-1A's for one of the lowest system noise floors you could ever hope for.

If you want to save a few bucks, I HIGHLY recommend the Sony PCM-M10 recorder (199 when you add-to-cart and B and H photo). The onboard mic's are the best I have ever heard for an onboard soloution (Primo em-172's with only 14db self noise). Hard to beat for that quality, and impossible to beat at the price. It will outperform the internals on a zoom h4n based off self-noise alone. Featurewise, though, the Zoom is still the way to go.

Either way, you are on the right track with an LPCM recorder. I have been preaching the gospel of higher quality audio for a bit now, and I promise that once you try it, you will never want to go back.

best regards,
Andy

[miller4505]

ourobouros2k2, on Sep 22 2010, 03:59 PM, said:

I would also recommend the H4n over the RT-EVP. I don't have any experience with the RT-EVP, but I do have with zoom products and they are very good. Ultimately I think you will like it better, plus the dual phantom power XLR inputs would let you really enjoy a set of R0de NT-1A's for one of the lowest system noise floors you could ever hope for.

If you want to save a few bucks, I HIGHLY recommend the Sony PCM-M10 recorder (199 when you add-to-cart and B and H photo). The onboard mic's are the best I have ever heard for an onboard soloution (Primo em-172's with only 14db self noise). Hard to beat for that quality, and impossible to beat at the price. It will outperform the internals on a zoom h4n based off self-noise alone. Featurewise, though, the Zoom is still the way to go.

Either way, you are on the right track with an LPCM recorder. I have been preaching the gospel of higher quality audio for a bit now, and I promise that once you try it, you will never want to go back.

best regards,
Andy

what recorder do you think is better Zoom H4n or Roland Edirol R-09HR

[miller4505]

Im going to be using the internal mic

[miller4505]

Im also thinking about getting the Sony PCM-D50

[ourobouros2k2]

H4n and the Edirol are both good choices. Personally I would go with the H4n because I find it's overall design more appealing and the option of using XLR inputs is a big deal to me.

The PCM-D50 is a good recorder, but lacks mp3 recording ability (not sure if that is important to you or not) and it is limited to Memory Stick Duo expandable memory. Also no XLR inputs (I feel that all of those factors should be included at it's price point).

Truthfully you will love any of the above mentioned recorders, it's just a matter of what features that you want for what you are wanting to pay.

regards,
Andy

[miller4505]

ourobouros2k2, on Sep 23 2010, 02:54 PM, said:

H4n and the Edirol are both good choices. Personally I would go with the H4n because I find it's overall design more appealing and the option of using XLR inputs is a big deal to me.

The PCM-D50 is a good recorder, but lacks mp3 recording ability (not sure if that is important to you or not) and it is limited to Memory Stick Duo expandable memory. Also no XLR inputs (I feel that all of those factors should be included at it's price point).

Truthfully you will love any of the above mentioned recorders, it's just a matter of what features that you want for what you are wanting to pay.

regards,
Andy

thank you for the help Im going to get the H4n Im sure its alot better than the RCA recorder I payed 30 for. if I get some good EVPs I will post them Im sure I will get alot of EVPs I always do.

[ourobouros2k2]

Don't be discouraged if your evp counts drop when you upgrade recorders. I too used to use the cheap RCA recorders and I didn't realize until listening to the same audio on both a zoom h2 and the RCA that the majority of the evp I got with the RCA were false positive. They sounded like very convincing voices, but when played along side the same audio from the h2, I found they were simply investigator related, bug or contaminant related, or otherwise benign. It made a believer out of me. I don't think that the actual number of evp's are decreased, I just think that it is a lot easier to discern the false positive ones.

These fine recorders are very capable of recording evp's, so don't get discouraged if they don't capture one right away. I think it was close to 14 hours of recording on the PCM-m10 before I finally got one (or three, rather).

Best of luck, and can't wait to hear how you like your new recorder!

Andy

[CaveRat2]

miller4505, on Sep 23 2010, 03:38 PM, said:

thank you for the help Im going to get the H4n Im sure its alot better than the RCA recorder I payed 30 for. if I get some good EVPs I will post them Im sure I will get alot of EVPs I always do.

Any of the mentioned recorders will be a big step up from the 30$ RCA.

But I will caution you, the cheap recorder will get many more EVPs than the better quality ones. Trouble is they are False positives! When you take the plunge to better quality you eliminate the junk that finds its way into cheap stuff and as a result you get far fewer hits. But the ones you do get will be much more reliable evidence. As an example, I use high end recorders and have for some time. With over 4,000 hours of recording analyzed I have exactly 6 segments that I feel are good EVPs. That breaks down to about 30 seconds of good audio out of 4,000 hours.

Regardless of what brand you buy, most quality recorders allow you to set some recording options. For EVP work I recommend the following settings:

1. Record in uncompressed WAV format or other non-lossy mode. Do not use MP3 or CELP based recording.

2. Sample at 96 KBPS or higher.

3. Record in stereo using external mics

4. Use a 24 bit A to D conversion process. I beleive all the recorders we discussed here have that capability.

Beyond that it's a matter of choosing one you are comfortable with. Regarding which mics to use, there are a couple considerations. Phantom power will allow you to use some very good external mics, but be sure the impedence match is correct. The overall sensitivity and low noise figures apply only if the proper match is made. A mismatch will either worsen the S/N ratio or result in lower overall sensitivity. You will need to determine which mic / recorder combination is best for your applications taking portability, cost, performance into account.