Nice sale on Zoom H1 Portable Audio Recorder

Super good deal on a portable digital audio recorder I find myself using all the time. Right now you can get an additional -$30 OFF a (Blue color) Zoom H1 Portable Digital Audio Recorder (found here).

blue-zoom-h1-audio-recorderzoom-h1-blue-audio-recorderzoom-h1-blue
Learn-More-sm Zoom H1 Portable Digital Audio Recorder

The small form factor of the Zoom H1 can also be used as a handheld microphone (tip: add a Foam Windscreen) during interviews, or attach an AspenMics H1 Clip to use as a belt worn audio recorder paired with a Lav Mic. Many people will use this technique during weddings to mic up the groom and officiant. Often this is better than working with a wireless audio kit if you're concerned about audio drop outs or wireless interference issues.

 

With the latest Zoom H1 firmware installed, you can also use the H1 as a USB Audio interface with your computer. For computers that don't have an easy Mic input, it's a way to use your Zoom H1 Stereo Mics as your computer mic or whatever mic you have connected to the 3.5mm input on the H1. This can be used for podcasting or recording Screen capture videos and tutorials.

 11 Comments





11 thoughts on “Nice sale on Zoom H1 Portable Audio Recorder

  1. Post author

    @Apostolos - Yes. It has to do with different types of compression. ProRes from the URSA is less compressed than the H264 from Lumix. When a computer has to play a compressed file, it has to unpack every frame. If it is less compressed, it has less unpacking to do. Therefore less CPU or GPU processing is needed.

    Having small files is beneficial for storage, but it's not optimal for playback and editing. Especially if you have to play multiple files at the same time (multicam editing without proxy). When you render Proxy in FCPX so that you can do multicam editing, I typically have the proxies rendered to Prores Proxy. After that, i've been able to play over 9 video files simultaneously with no frame drops in my Angle Viewer.

  2. Yeah, I think I chopped off a sentence there. I meant to write "you mean computers will play the ProRes that's coming out of the mini-URSA easier than the compressed Lumix files?"

  3. Post author

    @Apostolos - Lumix cameras don't record in Prores. They record in H264. Both can be used in an .MOV container, but they are not the same. Prores plays smooth because it is a bigger file size and less compressed (doesn't need to be unpacked to play which is CPU intensive). That's one of the selling points when buying an external HDMI recorder like an Atomos or BlackMagic Video Assist. They record in Prores which is easier to start editing.

  4. All the new motherboards (AMD or Intel) have USB 3.1 gen. 2 which is supposedly twice as fast as USB 3.0. A mini-URSA (or something in that sub 10k super35 sensor) is in my sights, to purchase within the next year or two. But for the immediate future I'll be shooting Panasonics G85/GX85/GH5. You're saying that a computer will play the ProRes 422 easier that what's coming out of the Lumix series cameras? I thought the ProRes files are much larger than what I get out of the Lumix cameras.

  5. Post author

    @Apostolos - If you can get USB 3, you'll be fine to edit 4K files. Keep in mind that the compression makes a big deal too. On a MAC, the Ursa Mini 4.6K 10 bit files are easy to play as it records in ProRes. The same system will struggle more on 8bit 4K GH4 or Sony 8bit 4K footage because it's highly compressed.

  6. Thank you very much for taking time to reply. I have a Hackintosh, which is almost seven years old, still capable to edit in 1080p, but it's time to upgrade in order to be able to cut 4k easily. I haven't used FCP7 in a while and I never made the transition to FCP X, so for the past few years I'm editing almost exclusively in Premiere. I did the proxy thing manually, essentially downgrading files to 1080p and editing there, before linking to the original files in the end. So, I decided that the best value would be a Windows 10 system and as I was getting ready to purchase the parts, I was made aware of the new inexpensive AMD chips, the Ryzen. Sorry if I'm repeating myself here, but basically I'm trying to determine if the lack of Thunderbolt (in a AMD-based system) will make my like difficult towards editing 4k in the original resolution. I am confused as to whether people are accessing footage from Thunderbolt external drives, during editing, or Thunderbolt is only used for transferring. In the AMD side, the fastest you can do now, would be USB 3.1 gen. 2, which supposedly has the speed of 10 gigabits per second, or the speed for Thunderbolt 1. I'm thinking off adding a RAID5 internally in this new computer build, besides SSDs of course.

  7. Post author

    @Apostolos - I have a few different computer systems setup in my office. My top system is a Mac Pro (trashcan) fully loaded running with Thunderbolt external drives. The other is a modest 5K iMac (fully loaded) using an external USB 3.0 Drive for edits. With normal linear editing it's possible to use USB 3.0 to edit and play 4K files smooth enough.

    When we are editing in a multicam we typically do this in FCPX. But because we're working with 4K video files playing simultaneously in the viewer angles, the system cannot play several 4K Video files simultaneously and smoothly.

    So the workflow for the slower system is to first create the multicam clip (sync via Timecode or Audio in FCPX). Then batch run Proxy files for all the media. At this point we just let the system run and come back tomorrow. When proxy files are created, simply change the viewer mode to 'Proxy' and the multicam edits are now super easy. We've played 10 different camera angles simultaneously at full framerates - very smooth. When rendering out, FCPX pulls from the original 4K files.

  8. Hey Emm:

    I have a storage question for you. Right now I'm shooting mostly multi-camera compressed video, with a bunch of G85 and GX85 cameras. I will soon be adding one or two GH5 to the fleet, and I'm looking into possibly a Mini Ursa next year. Do you edit off of extenal storage and if so, what do you use for that? I'm asking because my aging Hackintosh cannot handle 4k any more and I was thinking of building a new system. I was going to build an Intel Windows system, but AMD has this new line of processors, Ryzen, which offer a lot for the money. Trouble is there is no Thunderbolt on any the AMD side and I think I'm forced to stay with the more expensive Intel options. What do you think? Is Thunderbolt a necessity for editing 4k projects externally, especially the ones with fatter codecs?

  9. Harryg

    Can you suggest a good quality lavalier microphone? Not high prices .(europe not usa dealers).Thanks in advance.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *



RSS Feed Widget


Top Selling Drones