Cassette v. 1/4" v. 1/2" (life beyond the DAW)

[Dr ZEE]

GemSmith, a simple question for you: can you spend (do you have money) somewhat $300-..up to $1000 (depending on condition and being lucky) for analog recording machine?
if you can and the sound of your recording IS important to you, then start shopping around and go for 1/2" 8-track... forget about worring about your mixer, about your cables, bal/unbal crap etc.. , and yes, it is a big difference from cassette 8-tracker.
*********
if you can live with four track, then machines like TEAC a-3340/Tascam 34 and similar are capable of giving you great result.
***********
tascam 388 is one of a kind unit as I can tell (also I don't have any personal experience with it, just from what I know from readin and blah blah with people). I would not compare it with cassette recorder of any kind for many reasons.
*********
then you get various cassette multitrack recorders, and they ARE not the same. I personally can not level with cassette recorder as a serious recording/production tool, but I would understand the point if somebody would disagree with me on it.

well, good luck
... finding a r-t-r multitrack recorder in good condition is not that easy as may seem like (from my experience). Yes, e-bay helps allot, but also, remeber: "go get it, man"-factor ...meaning, when you find something you like, it does not mean you got it... not yet, that is... you gotta watch, bid and win, and there are usually at least three-four or so dudes just like you sitting behind the bush, waiting for the last 30 sec. of the auction

 

[FALKEN]

Wow, thanks for the great replys everyone... I feel like I'm getting somewhere in understanding the options available to me.

So if I've got this correct, it doesn't sound like there is too much to be gained by going from the Tascam 424 MKIII cassette 4-track up to the Tascam 388 1/4" 8-track... The tape speeds are identical on these two machines, and the tape width per track would be identical. What makes the 388 superior?

The other nice thing about the 424 MKIII cassette is that it features XLR inputs. It may sound trivial, but that's what I'm all set up for thus far with cables.

My intended uses for an analog deck are to do all my tracking to it... For example, use a 4 beat drum count in at the beginning of each track, and then dump all the tracks onto my DAW (pro tools LE via mBox), sync up the tracks using the transients from the drum count in, and away I go... That's my plan at least... any flaws in my thinking? Any suggestions?

I have a feeling that what may end up happening is that I even do mixing on the 4-track or 8-track and just dump it into Pro Tools for a little pseudo mastering, and then burn it to CD. I'm very excited to be working in the analog domain again, as opposed to staring at the computer screen and clicking a mouse.

This is mostly for my own music... I've recorded a couple small time projects for others so far, but that isn't my full intention yet at this point.

I've been spending some time listening to the Black Keys lately, and I read on this forum that they've done all three of their albums on a 388... Like 'em or leave 'em, I think their recorded sound is very good.

1/4" tape is different from casette, no matter what the tape width per track is. the tape is heavier. its the difference between a toothpick and a baseball bat. that's also why there is lower noise.

you won't be able to sync a tape machine to a pc without using a midi timesync type of device. you will have to stripe a track on the tape machine with the timecode and then sync your PC to that. so plan for using one track for that. You are probably better off mixing to subgroups to your PC or just mixing outright on a mixer into your PC.

 

[cjacek]

I already know that to get decent results on a cassette machine that I need to run it at 2x speed (7.something),

3 3/4 inches per second is the top speed for your 424mkIII.

and also that I should track to 'virgin' tape that has never been recorded on before...

Some would argue this but I wouldn't. Multi pass tape never hurt my recordings.

How many times can you record over a cassette without degradation and noise?

I'd like to see a test study answering that very question.

Many of the 1/4" tape based 4-tracks are fairly affordable, and I was wondering how substantial the sonic improvements would be over cassette-based 4-tracks... Any thoughts?

Quite a substantial improvement in all parameters like S/N ratio, distortion, frequency response etc... Night and day difference.

OR, would it be better save my money and wait a little longer to get into a decent 1/2" unit?

1/2" what ? 4 track ? Yeah, that would yield further improvements over narrower track formats.

What is the used market like on 1/4" and 1/2" machines?

Check eBay and www.prepal.com

Can you still find units in really good condition at decent prices?

It really depends. But generally, YES!

What kind of price can I expect to pay for a decent one?

Again, check eBay and prepal.com

I've already been told that Tascam and Otari are pretty much the best brands of these two formats, but what are some good models to look for?

TASCAM and Otari are not the only ones out-there but are plentiful on the used market, especially the TEAC/TASCAM. Calling them the "best" is very subjective and depends what you are looking for. I feel a TEAC or TASCAM is best for my purposes but others view it different.

 

[cjacek]

it doesn't sound like there is too much to be gained by going from the Tascam 424 MKIII cassette 4-track up to the Tascam 388 1/4" 8-track... The tape speeds are identical on these two machines, and the tape width per track would be identical. What makes the 388 superior?

The 388 goes 7 1/2 ips while the 424's top speed is 3 3/4 ips. While on paper the 388 might not be a "substantial" improvement, it really is! I know 'cause I have one and also had experience with various cassette portas. The 388 blows them all away in every category!

 

[A Reel Person]

Let me make a few comments, if I may.

I have most of the gear you're talking about, from the low-end through the high-end cassette 4-track Portastudios, 1/4" 4-track reel/reels, Fostex 1/4" 8-track reel/reels, the Tascam 388, 1/2" 8-track reels,... and more.

The Tascam 424mkIII is the most recent high end Portastudio that's 4-tracks onto cassette with a nice 8x2 mixer and 4-simul-record capability. It's very new-ish, but went out of production and off the retailers shelves about a year ago. The high-speed setting on the 424mkIII and comparable Portastudios is 3-3/4 ips. It's a heck of a nice unit, especially for starters, but also is valuable for more seasoned/experienced users, such as myself. The mixer section is very nice.

The 488, 488mkII, & 688 are Tascam's 8-track cassette Portastudios, and they're pretty nice for those who want 8-tracks on a budget & who want to stick to the Portastudio format. The sound is pretty good, & probably better than most would assume just by looking at the format. The 488 is kinda low-end but useable. The 488mkII gives more/better features than the 488(std), and the features of the 688 are exceptional. The 488/488mkII can record up to 4-tracks simultaneously, while the 688 records up to 8-simul. A similar product to the 688 is the 238 Syncaset, which records up to 8-simul, but is rackmount & requires an external mixer.

The Tascam 388 is truly one of a kind. It's 8-tracks on 1/4" tape using 7" reels and running at 7.5 ips, (that's twice the speed of a high speed cassette Portastudio), with a self-contained integrated mixer. The sound is good, and the mixer section is outstanding. The 388 does have 8-XLR mic inputs and a full implement of level controls, so I don't know how the misconception occurred that it doesn't have XLR's.

All of the above Tascams sport dbx noise reduction, built in.

There's a whole line of 1/4" 8-track Fostex reel/reels that sport 7" reels/max, (A8, A8LR, Model 80, R8), and one that supports 10.5" reels, (E8). All of these Fostex machines run 15 ips and Dolby C,... which on paper should sound better than their Tascam counterpart, (388), but somehow in real world testing the difference isn't so obvious, and it's a stretch to say any of these Fostexes is vastly superior to it's Tascam counterpart. THAT, however, is my personal "amatuer" opinion, and as with all things, "YMMV".

Then, there are 1/4" 4-track reel/reels, and these will give a far superior sound to any 4-track cassette based Portastudio, based purely on the superior specs of track width and 7.5-15 ips tape speed. There are many models, but the ones I can think of this moment are the Tascam 34, 34B, 22-4 and Fostex A4. The Tascam 34/34B use either 7" or 10.5" reels, and the Fostex uses 7" reels/max. The Tascam 22-4 also uses 7" reels/max. The Tascams use dbx as an add-on component, (DX-4D), while the Fostex has Dolby C NR built in. The 34B is unique in that it has standard line inputs on RCA connectors, and also Mic/Line inputs on 1/4" jacks, so it's the only 4-track reel/reel that lends itself to more simplified field recording with the deck & some mics, but without a mixer. That's an interesting and useful feature, IMO.

The 1/2" 8-tracks are the Tascam 80-8, 38, TSR-8, and ATR-60/8,... from old to new, & from low end to high end, respectively. All these 1/2" 8-tracks run 10.5" reels and 15 ips. The TSR-8 is the only one above that has dbx NR built in, & the other ones would require external dbx units. The sound of 1/2" 8-tracks is noticeably superior to it's 1/4" 8-track little brothers. Tape cost is higher, so that's a consideration.

On the subject of XLR inputs,... IMO you are not actually looking for a 1/4" 4-track, 1/4" 8-track, or 1/2" 8-track with XLR inputs. It's your outboard mixer, or mixer section that requires XLR MIC inputs. All the reel/reel 4 & 8 trackers with XLR inputs have XLR LINE inputs, and would require any sort of mic-preamp anyway. I think seeking a reel/reel tape deck with XLR inputs is a misnomer, in context of your original question.

So,... in summary,... you've done the first step right in sourcing a 424mkIII. This unit should go far in bridging the gap between what you want and what you're actually getting in recorded sound.

A step up would be a 1/4" reel/reel, and without exception you'll get a clearer, more robust sound from a 1/4" reel than a 4-track cassette,... with all other things being equal.

On the subject of the 388, it's an all-in-one Portastudio format solution, with the tape section delivering excellent sound & the integrated mixer being topnotch. There's no other comparable units in the "class" of the 388, as it's one of a kind. It's hard to go wrong with the 388, especially for those seeking an all-in-one solution, and for those who are still somewhat budget-minded.

The line of Fostex 1/4" 8-tracks are there for those who want them, although I'm personally not inclined to recommend them directly. They have acceptible sound, but nothing that can claim to rival or top the sound of the Tascam 388, but that of course depends on who you ask. There are many folks who'd swear by Fostex units, while simultaneously taking great joy in contradicting nearly e'thing I'd say. Those posts are sure to follow! Note that all the Fostex reel 8-tracks would require a comparable outboard mixer to accommodate your standard in/out requirements.

The 1/2" 8-track raises the bar even further on high fidelity, which in most cases speaks for itself. I'm into Tascams, so that's what I recommend. There are Otaris out there, but none of them ever impressed me, in my "amatuer" mindset, and I don't use them, so I'm not inclined to recommend them. They're there for those who want them, though.

I've tried to cover as much ground as possible, in detail, given that I'm also trying to keep my posts short,... and I've other things to do, so I'll let it go at that.

Good luck!!

 

[cjacek]

Great informative post on the 'ol mighty 388, Dave!

 

[Dr ZEE]

The 1/2" 8-tracks are the Tascam 80-8, 38, TSR-8, and ATR-60/8,... from old to new, & from low end to high end, respectively.

from old to new - YES.
from low end to high end - NO. Different featurs - yes. ATR machine got some good guts and muscles. Teac (tascam) 80-8 got no 'features' - just the recorder and that's it - built like it should be, though . If we are talking about recorded sound as result these machines are all about the same, but then again, it depends on who you ask, some will tell you that 80-8 is the only "real thing" in that bunch.... meaning? - nothing really. They are all just great as it can be (imho) if in working order.

/respects

 

[GemSmith]

Wow. Thank you very much for all the excellent, thoughtful, and highly informative replys EVERYONE!

Dave, I think if you're reply had been the only one here, I would have been completely satisfied... It was a FANTASTIC summary of reasonable options and considerations to be made for someone in my current amatuer-desiring-analog-on-a-budget position.

I'm going to use my Tascam 424 and really enjoy it, and then move on to the 388 somewhere on down the road... That 388 sounds like as much of a piece of gear as I will EVER need given my current recording ambitions and goals.

I want to develop my recording abilities further, and once I feel that my abilities stretch beyond this 424, I'll move onto the 388 (or as soon as I can find a good price on one in good condition). The 388 sounds like a great all-in-one, cost effective, good results solution.

The physical and even sonic limitations of the 424 are welcome at this point, as I need to take a more basic, roots approach to recording for while... I can certainly work just fine in Pro Tools, and will undoubtedly return to it and use it in some capacity, but I think my 'reel' need here (pun intended ) is to further develop my recording chops by having more simplistic limitations in my gear. I think that's the most honest-with-myself conclusion I can come to here...

Once again, I apologize for my earlier outburst... Yesterday was a day with rough edges all the way around for me, and not the good kind of analog tape rough edges... Thanks again for all the contributions!

 

[GemSmith]

One other quick question... Someone told me that I should stick to 60 minute cassettes for best results. Is this true? What's the logic behind that?

 

[taperocket]

Yes, 60 minutes or less have a thicker binding than longer length tapes (i.e. 90 and 12) so stick with the shortest length tape you need for whichever project you are working on and don't exceed 60 mins! I've owned a Tascam 488 MKII, 388, and TSR-8. I think they get noticeably better with increasing tape width, the TSR-8 being the best, but the 388 was nothing to scoff with a great analog sound, an excellent mixer, and all kinds of ins and outs! Have fun with it and get one in good condition when the time is right. I wouldn't try to get one shipped so wait for one to appear locally. Good luck, by the way, I track onto a TSR-8 and dump into pro tools with great results. The analog sounds better and recording doesn't feel like recording without spinning tape BUT I love the unlimited tracks, easy editing, plug-ins, etc of Pro Tools so this way I get the best of both worlds!

 

[famous beagle]

Just one word of caution regarding the 388. It's a beast. It's definitely not something you pack up on a whim and take with you like a 424 or something. It's big and heavy. I supposed it IS a portastudio, but not in the way we think of them now.

Just food for thought.

 

[GemSmith]

Crap... I ordered a bulk of 100, 66 minute type II cassettes from tape.com... is that extra 6 minutes on each tape going to mean that they're not going to have the thicker binding?


Good advice on getting a 388 locally... problem is that it's going to be hard to find something like that locally where I live, so I'll have to be patient, and a little lucky.

 

[A Reel Person]

I don't think the extra 6 minutes on those cassettes means they'd use a different...

tape stock than the standard C-60's, although I don't have any evidence to back that opinion up. It's my gut feeling that it should be the same tape stock as a C-60.

I've re-used tapes and not had any undue side effects. If the recorder is functioning properly, the erase head should completely wipe the previous signal, just before the record head rewrites onto tape.

PS: I forgot to mention the Tascam 48 & 58 in the line of 1/2" 8-tracks. They'd be contemporary with the 38 model, but higher end, respectively.

 

[apl]

Is anyone making 1/2" 8 track machines today?

 

[cjacek]

Is anyone making 1/2" 8 track machines today?

Not sure of the format though but there was a foreign company (Russia, Ukraine ??? ) which still makes(?) a multitrack .. Someone posted a link some time ago but I haven't found it, despite searching the threads.

ATR Service has some for sale and they said that NEW multitrack decks will be introduced next year. Not sure of the specifications though.

 

[cjacek]

I believe 60 and 90 minute tapes have similar thickness. I have used both lengths and never had any issues. Stay away from longer than 90 though.

 

[cjacek]

Here's a nice beast: http://www.atrservice.com/atr108c/

 

[Beck]

Is anyone making 1/2" 8 track machines today?

I believe Tascam was the last to throw in the towel for that format. Tascam still listed the TSR-8 through 1999. Otari stopped making the MX5050/8 some years before that. Not everyone made 8 on ½”. Oddly enough, Fostex never did.

 

[cjacek]

That 388 sounds like as much of a piece of gear as I will EVER need

IMHO, a working and factory spec'd TASCAM 388 is a perfect setup for a home recordist. It beats out any digital "portastudio" currently made, at any price.

 

[Beck]

IMHO, a working and factory spec'd TASCAM 388 is a perfect setup for a home recordist. It beats out any digital "portastudio" currently made, at any price.

I second that...