Behringer's FLOW 4V field recorder for $279 USD

[cmgoodin]

20 hours ago, Olle Sjostrom said:

Say they fixed these issues, would it be usable then? 

Well it might make it usable but several hardware problems like Timecode accuracy of +12 Frames in 1 Hour and input level knobs that just rotate continuously would require hardware re-design.  Also the user interface is very unusable right now but that could be changed in firmware but they would have to start again from scratch.

Take a look at the video I go over some of those things that firmware update won't fix.

I did file an error ticket with Music Tribe (Behringer tech support in Dubai)  They wrote me back an email that said they would forward my list to the developers and circle back when they had some answers.   We'll see if they can fix many of the problems.

I'm holding on to the recorder for now.  Luckily, I purchased it from Sweetwater sound and they give you a  free 2 year warranty.  Boy I think they may be giving a lot of refunds if the firmware is not updated soon.

[IronFilm]

On 6/5/2026 at 11:59 AM, cmgoodin said:

Also some design decisions like having rotary optical encoders with no stops

Zaxcom does the same, encoders with no stops. And this is even marketed as a good thing. (and I'd tend to agree)

 

Sad to hear about all the other problems though 😕 😞 That's really bad. Needs a lot of firmware fixes. 

[The Documentary Sound Guy]

Yup, Zaxcom does the same, and I hate it.  Makes mixing by touch impossible because you don't know when the fader is all the way down or where unity is.

I bought the external fader bank specifically so I could get keyed knobs for mixing with.

[Philip Perkins]

Having the TC be off by 12 fr per hour makes that TC unusable in any setting where the recording has to be matched with another timecoded recording (like from a camera).  I'd be curious to know if this machine's sample clock is accurate, like regardless of what the TC generator is doing is it really running at a solid 48k?  If the sample clock is as inaccurate as the TC system then the machine's sync is really no better than that of a mid-level PA console or USB interface running without external clock.

[DonovanBomb]

On 1/18/2026 at 2:32 PM, resonate said:

Here's Curtis Judd's first look at it. The interface seems clunky, but the preamps have potential. I personally detest Zoom F8's sound....can spot it from a mile away. (Yes i know the producers do not hear the difference, i  don't care - I do. And it's me hearing the tracks at the mix )

 

Old post but I just have to comment... Years ago I did a testimonial montage type commercial where my tracks played back to back with the shots done out of state by another mixer.  The sound of my Zoom F8 vs their 6-series mixer was embarrassing!  I got an MM-1 for my Zoom (which was a huge improvement) and then quickly picked up a 633 after.  We need to have more discussions about how things sound.

[Derek H]

Having a hard time believing the zoom preamps made that big of a difference. Did the other mixer use the same kind of mics? Same boom op? I think differences in the boom op’s technique alone would amount to a more audible difference than the preamps of a zoom F8 vs a 633. Maybe on your scenes you had to deal with wide and tight and for whatever reason they shot the other mixer’s scenes single camera. 
 

Too many variables to know for sure. Can you describe the difference?

[Nate Weaver]

On 6/5/2026 at 6:29 PM, cmgoodin said:

Boy I think they may be giving a lot of refunds if the firmware is not updated soon.

I ordered this back when, and it landed on my doorstep today.

 

I simultaneously was pulling it out and setting it up while letting YouTube auto play flow 4v search results.
 

Your vid came up 2nd. When you showed the folders and file names my jaw literally dropped. It’s hard to believe they shipped with this firmware 1.2. It’s hard to believe they went past .9 with files names like this. 

 

That said, I noticed the iOS app dropped yesterday, and I can’t help but think they were working on it until the last minute and probably a bigger shipment of them started hitting shores. So I’m going to wait a second for 1.3, or a public comment by Behringer acknowledging that 1.3 is en route, and has X fixes.

 

But I’m setting a reminder to return in 20 days so I don’t get stuck with this thing if they don’t get a new FW out by then, or a plan with a date. For my use case I can deal with many of the shortcomings, but identical clip filenames and hex folders is such a non-starter for ANY edit program, much less working professional post, it strains credulity. 
 

I didn’t expect much for 300, and I don’t need much, but good lord. 

[Mungo]

On 6/17/2026 at 10:18 PM, Derek H said:

Having a hard time believing the zoom preamps made that big of a difference. Did the other mixer use the same kind of mics? Same boom op? I think differences in the boom op’s technique alone would amount to a more audible difference than the preamps of a zoom F8 vs a 633. Maybe on your scenes you had to deal with wide and tight and for whatever reason they shot the other mixer’s scenes single camera. 
 

Too many variables to know for sure. Can you describe the difference?

 

On 6/17/2026 at 7:38 PM, DonovanBomb said:

Old post but I just have to comment... Years ago I did a testimonial montage type commercial where my tracks played back to back with the shots done out of state by another mixer.  The sound of my Zoom F8 vs their 6-series mixer was embarrassing!  I got an MM-1 for my Zoom (which was a huge improvement) and then quickly picked up a 633 after.  We need to have more discussions about how things sound.

 

That's completely off-topic, but: Yes, I agree. I came from analogue and 744T when the 633 came out and I still sometimes come into working with a 633. The 633 sounds harsh, kind of too strong in the higher mids. That's definitely not a smooth comfy sound, but for news, small interviews and speech recording in smaller fictional formats that may just fit. Probably that's why no one ever complained since the 633 is definitely made for these purposes.

I notice the difference to the 8-series I've been using most of the time (which sound perfect), also the MixPre are good, and also the 664 I've been using several times in between. Latter has a wonderful analogue signal chain, I just plugged in Schoeps MK4 and recorded several chamber concerts, sounded so great.

Recently I had to work with a Zoom F8 (first generation) and have to admit I was really impressed about the audio quality - not of the rest of the machine of course.