[Richard Crowley]

#1 is the prefered method. As you say, your Roland Tri-Capture has a balanced, line-level output. And the Zoom H5 TRS inputs (part of the XLR/TRS “combo” input jacks) will accept LINE-LEVEL audio when the H5 is configured properly.

Note you are NOT connecting to the H5 “mic-input”. You cannot connect ANY line-level audio signal to a mic-level input. Note also that whether a signal is balanced or not is quite independent on the signal level (mic-level, line-level, etc.)

#2 is neaarly the same as #1 except that it uses an UN-balanced signal. While that may work just fine in many cases, there may be some situations where the balanced connection’s ability to reject ambient noise could be a big advantage. No particularly good reason to use unbalanced cable (TS) when you have a proper balanced source and a balanced destination. Of course, if you had an unbalanced source (which you DO NOT) and a balanced destination, then using an unbalanced TS cord would be preferable.

#3 is NOT likely to perform as well as #1 (or even #2). The headphone output of most gear is not designed to the same standards of quality as the main output.

———————————————————————————
Recording audio without metering and monitoring is exactly like framing and focusing without looking at the viewfinder.

[Richard Crowley]

Just coincidentally, these were referenced in a similar thread over on the dvxuser forum:

Lineup basics for dB: https://youtu.be/pJWKLbVZVU4

Lineup basics for PPM: https://youtu.be/s7jG_djmiX0

And coincidentally, I just get one of those Behringer CT100 cable testers which include a test tone oscillator. It is quite a solid little piece of test gear and quite cleverly designed. I really like it. Recommended,

———————————————————————————
Recording audio without metering and monitoring is exactly like framing and focusing without looking at the viewfinder.

Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!

This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.

[Richard Crowley]

But why aim for a peak of 0 on the mixer if you can record at say +4 +8 or +12? If it’s not clipping and not distorted sounding through headphones what would be the concern?

Because we operate in the “Real World”(TM) where unexpected things happen. If you are sitting at your NLE and mixing down your tracks in the comfort of Hindsight, you can target for 0dB FS if you like. In fact, most popular “music” that is produced in recent decades, and most radio stations are eager participants in the “Loudness Wars” where they squezee every last bit (in all senses) out of the audio level. If you look at the waveform of most any popular music from the last 30 years, it looks practically solid with peaks within a few tenths of a dB away from Full Scale.

But when you are out on location recording something, you never know when something will happen that will produce an unexpected peak. Back in the bad old analog days, magnetic tape was pretty forgiving of unexpected peaks. Some people even LIKEd the sound of magnetic tape driven into saturation and they still make analog mag tape and keep those old monstrosities running just for that “tape sound”.

But here in the Digital Age, 0dB FS is FULL SCALE. And that is a HARD limit. When your’e out of bits, you’re dead in the water. There is ZERO HEADROOM. So the only way to keep your track from hitting that 0dB FS ceiling is to record with peaks down at some safe level. Now, certainly WHERE your safe recording level target is depends on what you are recording.

If you are recording excitable play-by-play announcers at a sporting event, you must remember that they are quite likely to yell into the microphone at any moment. OTOH, if you are recording the oral history of a frail 103 year old grandmother, you probably need some extra gain to overcome the low sound levels, and you are pretty safe that she won’t suddenly jump out of her chair and start yelling.

The SD 302 is labeled in the “old style” familiar to generations of sound recording professionals who grew up using analog recorders. Traditional VU meters had the reference of “0dB” up around 75 or 80% of full-scale. That means that if your target level is -20dB FS, then that is labeled “0 dB” on the SD302. Which is handy as -20 dBFS remains the preferred target when you have good, quiet gear like Sound Devices.

People who are stuck with using lesser (“pro-sumer” or consumer) gear have taken to using -12dB FS as a standard target because they just don’t have the kind of working dynamic range of the top of the line gear like Sound Devices, et.al. And the higher noise floor goes along with the limited “metering” available, perhaps just a few( 4~10) LEDs which just adds insult to injury by making the job of monitoring levels even more difficult.

———————————————————————————
Recording audio without metering and monitoring is exactly like framing and focusing without looking at the viewfinder.

[Richard Crowley]

With nothing more than that very basic symptom, it could be any number of things.
When was it working last time? How long ago?
Were the batteries left in? Is there any sign of battery leakage and/or corrosion?

———————————————————————————
Recording audio without metering and monitoring is exactly like framing and focusing without looking at the viewfinder.

[Richard Crowley]

Here is one possible solution…
https://juicedlink.com/collections/audio-recorders

———————————————————————————
Recording audio without metering and monitoring is exactly like framing and focusing without looking at the viewfinder.

[Richard Crowley]

Recording audio (whether remotely or even locally) without monitoring is always a huge risk. Especially when recording things in the Real World where there is zero chance of “Take Two”. See my signature line below.

Depending on your budget, there are wireless microphone kits with built-in recorder in the transmitter end. Zaxcom has a monopoly on this scheme in the US and it a rather expensive solution. There is also a product that plugs between the microphone and the wireless transformer which does local recording in case of failure of the wireless link.

Perhaps the most cost-effective solution would be to have a second, backup recorder on the subject. The simple utility kind with a built-in microphone. For example: SONY ICD PX333 Digital Voice Recorder, and at least a dozen nearly-equivalent options.

———————————————————————————
Recording audio without metering and monitoring is exactly like framing and focusing without looking at the viewfinder.

[Richard Crowley]

You did not mention what batteries you are using? Note that rechargable batteries have a lower voltage output than “primary” (non-rechargable) cells. It is not uncommon to find gear that won’t operate on rechargable batteries because they appear to be primary cells that are at their end of life. It is also possible that there is simply an intermittent fault with the transmitter. As you note, that is not “normal” behavior.

———————————————————————————
Recording audio without metering and monitoring is exactly like framing and focusing without looking at the viewfinder.

[Richard Crowley]

I heard only ambient noise in your sample. Remember that the default mic head that comes with the wireless kit is not noted for its exemplary performance. Most people who are serious about audio replace it with a better-performing microphone.

Remember also that many microphones are sensitive to RF interference from their own transmitter. So I would recommend keeping the mic head AWAY from the transmitter (an especially the transmitter’s antenna) at least 50cm, and the more the better.

Also, epecially with digitally-controlled (or transmitted) audio gear, it is not uncommon to hear “zipper noise” from the action of the digital circuits when CHANGING settings. In more modern digital gear, they have eliminated that problem, but it is still present in many older analog designs with some digital controls. Of course, this should not be a a problem as you are not changing settings during actual recording.

———————————————————————————
Recording audio without metering and monitoring is exactly like framing and focusing without looking at the viewfinder.

[Richard Crowley]

Define “better”? Would you get “better” image quality from a real camera vs. shooting with your phone? On one level, you are correct, the audio won’t be “different”. However, for both the audio and the picture, you don’t have anywhere near the control over the audio or video in a phone that you would in a proper camera, camcorder or audio recorder.

But perhaps recording audio to your phone is exactly the same trade-off decision as shooting picture with your phone. Having the complete solution in one quite small, ultra-portable device.

———————————————————————————
Recording audio without metering and monitoring is exactly like framing and focusing without looking at the viewfinder.

[Richard Crowley]

It is true that most pro-sumer recorders and camcorders have mic preamps which are not notable for their good performance. And outboard mic preamps and/or mixers are the popular remedy.

However there are some products like the premium Sound Devices gear which have mic preamps of legendary performance. They cannot be “improved” by using an external mic preamp. Indeed, the Sound Devices mic preamps are often used as the outboard mic preamp to improve the performance of recorders of modest quality.

Recording audio without metering and monitoring is exactly like framing and focusing without looking at the viewfinder.