In the DR-22WL thread, discussion has recently centred on the sound quality of its internal mics vs the H2N. This has prompted me to run a test of the M10 vs the H2N vs the DR-22WL, with an expensive Sennheiser MKH series MS rig included as a benchmark. How do the internal mics of these inexpensive recorders compare with high end mics?
There's two ways of conducting such a test - either you mount the mics/recorders as close together as possible and record simultaneously (which makes working with a live sound source possible) or you use them one at a time (which means the source has to be pre-recorded to eliminate variations in a live performance). Right now, the second option is the only one I can choose. There's a big downside, as recording the sounds of loudspeakers in a small untreated space gives less than stellar results no matter how you do it, but in this test I've included the high end rig as a benchmark. In essence, a really good portable recorder would produce results similar to the high end rig (even though the result in itself is far from perfect).
The test file lasts exactly one minute and is a sample of jazz piano, bass, and drums. This provides plenty of low (bass and kick) mid (piano) and high (cymbals) material to help reveal the qualities of each recorder.
In the SoundCloud file link at the end of this post, the first minute is the original test file (not through loudspeakers). The second minute is the sound of the test file played through Tannoy 607 loudspeakers and recorded with a Sennheiser MKH series MS pair into a R-44 recorder. The third minute is the same but recorded on the internal mics of a Sony M10. The fourth minute is likewise on the Tascam DR-22WL and the last minute is recorded on the Zoom H2N (MS setting).
Recording speakers in a room adds colouration to the original file from the speakers themselves and from room reflections. The purpose of the test is to determine whether, when compared to the "benchmark" of the Sennheiser recording, the three recorders add even more colouration to the sound (most noticable in the piano) and how well they handle the lowest and highest frequencies.
Note that colouration can be affected by the stereo polar pattern of the mics (if they capture more of the room then they are likely to capture more of the room reflection colourations). The benchmark is an MS recording - the three portables use crossed cardioids, slightly spaced omnis, and MS mic arrays, so there you've got significant differences at the outset. If you replay the test in mono you might avoid the distraction of the stereo image.
To help reveal the stereo imaging qualities of the recorders, the last five seconds of the test file has the right channel muted, so the sound should jump sharply to the left at that point. Here the MS recordings excel, the crossed cardioids are not bad, and the omnis are pretty poor.
Don't make any judgements about noise performance. There are no silent sections and in any event, the room in which the test recordings were made has a couple of PCs and several disk drives running. In part two of the test (to follow in at least 24 hours) I will try to compare noise in a quiet room.
The best way to check the sound of one device against another (and against the benchmark) would be to download the file, load it into your DAW, split it at each minute, arrange each device's file on its own track one below the other, then play repeatedly while soloing each track for instant comparison at the same place in the song.
I won't comment further on my own views on the outcome right away but of course I do have an opinion!
Enjoy!
https://soundcloud.com/ozpeter/shootout-single-file-no-fx