Tascam 38 or Teac 3340s

C

chillward

New member
Hi guys,

I'm new to this Forum but already stumbled across some great threads here! So here's my thing: I am also a newbie to analog reel to reel recording. I got the chance to get a Tascam 38 or Teac 3340s around my area. Both for about an equal amount of money (around 400 USD I am from Europe!) and both are in the same good working condition. It is going to be my first machine and I will use it for recording my own Bands and friends Bands mostly rock/psychedelic with basic set up drums/2 guitars/bass/vocals. I am gonna get a Studio Mixer (havent decided which one yet) and I do have Microphones. 3 AKG C1000s old ones with battery (phantom power?!) a Sennheiser 431 md, shure 58 and a sm75. I will probably get an Interface first and try to do as little as possible on the computer with a free DAW which will probably be Studio One Prime as I am planing on switching to analog completley. Compressors I will try to get cheap on my countries version of craigs list. I know this upsets some of you since compressors are a huge part but I really wanna invest in the machine first.

As for my question: Which one would you chose with the details given and why? The 38 or 3340s. I really can't decide and can't wait to hear your opinions!

Thanks in advance!
 
Both machines have their pro's and cons. The 3340 will be cheaper to run because it only needs 1/4" tape. However the 38 will give you 8 tracks to play with instead of 4, and for what you're planning to record 4 tracks could be a bit too constraining.

Some people come into this from a DAW and assuming that 4 tracks means 4 stereo tracks. Sadly, this is not the case. It's 4 mono tracks, where you can set the panning at mixdown. You could pair two of them into stereo, but then you'll only have two tracks left for overdubbing.

If it were me, I'd go for the 38, but a 4-track deck does have its own minimalist aesthetic. Earlier psychedelia like 'Surrealistic Pillow', 'SF Sorrow', 'Sergeant Pepper' etc were done on 4-track machines and tons of track-bouncing, so if you're into that kind of drums-on-the-left-guitar-on-the-right hard panning you'll be in good company. Ideally you'd be looking for another 4-track deck if you want to work that way, since it generally requires a lot of tape-to-tape copying between machines (With EMI it also helped that each track was as wide as your entire tape). It will require a lot of thought and effort to engineer things in this way because you'll be fighting the limits of the machine. Which is either going to be fun or nightmarish depending on how patient you are.

Late 60s psych/early progressive rock was generally done on 8-track, e.g. 'Court of the Crimson King', 'Abbey Road', 'The Doughnut in Granny's Greenhouse', 'In A Gadda Da Vida', 'Tommy', Fairfield Parlour, etc. So the '38 would give you a lot more flexibility to record individual instruments and go back to re-record things.

If it were me, I'd go for the 8-track machine. But great things have been achieved on 4-track machines as well. Just know that it will require a lot more discipline both in terms of musicianship and engineering.
 
Wow thank you so much for the answer this opened a new perspective to my choice! As for the drums left guitar right thing: Is there any chance I could pass this since stereo panning is a huge deal for me. i live it on records like SF sorrow or Surrealisic Pillow bur I will probably try approaching a newer paychedelic sound for myself.

Another thing is I do own a Tascam 244 and after reading that converting to digital can cost you a lot of analog warmth I really want to consider that. Is it possible to hook the 38 or 3340s to the 244 and master there?

Also I saw a video on youtube where someone shows how you can check if the 3340s is at least mechanically working, bit I found no such thing for the 38. What should I definitely check before buying?
 
Right, if you've already used a cassette 4-track, that's basically what the A3340 is, but it should be higher fidelity and you'll need a separate mixer. You could indeed bounce back and forth between the 3340 and the 244. I'd hesitate to suggest mixing to cassette - ideally you'd want a stereo 1/4" machine for that if you're looking to do a completely analogue recording chain.

With the '38 the most critical thing is the condition of the heads. Make sure they're not too worn. I can't think of much specific to the 38 mechanics that wouldn't also apply to the A3340. Might be worth making sure that it switches output mode properly on all 8 tracks - the relays can get stuck with age.
 
Again, thanks jpmorris. Do you know a good rule of thumb guide on checking the heads? read a couple of other posts but usually people send pics and others reply "you cant really tell by the pic". Then by what can you tell if the heads are okay enough to record? Also what about the dbx units of the 38? Saw them but are they really needed?
 
Yeah, it's not easy to visually inspect them, to be honest. Even so, the heads are the most critical component on the deck. Keystoning is one thing to look out for - if the surface of the head is angled, e.g. narrow at the top and thick at the bottom that indicates an uneven pattern of wear which is not a good thing. In effect it means that the wide part of the head is going to fail before the rest of it.
Thin black lines in the centre of the the head may indicate that it's so worn it's opening up, which is very very bad.

It occurs to me that I might not be the best person to guide you on this, I have had a tendency to jump in feet-first rather than inspecting the machines in meticulous detail. I was also expecting other people to butt in and recommend the 4-track machine for whatever technical or philosophical merits it may have and am slightly uneasy because that hasn't happened.

As for DBX, that's very subjective. It will cut the tape his down tremendously. I run a TSR-8, which is the successor to the '38 and I've always used DBX on it to great effect. The catch is that it doesn't like being overdriven, so if you want to try and slam the tape to get saturation, DBX will just get in the way. It can produce strange dynamics artifacts if it can't decode the recorded signal correctly, which may happen if the tape saturation kicks in.

They say that DBX works a lot better on the TSR-8 than it does on the '38 owing to the fact it's integrated into the machine - I've never tried outboard DBX before so I can't comment on that.
 
jpmorris said:
It occurs to me that I might not be the best person to guide you on this, I have had a tendency to jump in feet-first rather than inspecting the machines in meticulous detail. I was also expecting other people to butt in and recommend the 4-track machine for whatever technical or philosophical merits it may have and am slightly uneasy because that hasn't happened.
Click to expand...

Don't worry you've already answerd plenty of my questions! I know this analog world has a lot of "do as you please and check it out for yourself" in it, so I am more than happy with the shared thoughts. As for the heads: Do you think a magnifing glass would be a good tool to check on the spots you described? Or do I see more I don't want to see with them?

Also you talked about recording the mono signal with a 4-Track. Let me try to ask this question: If I'd record the drums on each 4 Tracks - 2 OH on Track 1, Snare on 2, Kick on 3 and let's say directs on the toms on 4 then converting to the DAW then rolling the Tape back and overdubbing / erasing the 4 Drum Tracks on the Tape but not on the DAW then recording the guitar / bass / Vocals in the same procedure, wouldn't that give me an infinit amount of tracks or am I living in a dreamy bubble world?

Also the guy who is selling the 3340s 4 Track worked for Fostex in the 80s as Salesman and he specialised in setting up home studios too so I think he has taken much better care of the 3340s. He told me he still owns a sweet little analog home studio with plenty of machines and I can visit on Friday. Trying to take pictures and post them here on another thread.

Thanks again!
 
My opinion is the 3340 sounds better but the 38 will be WAY easier to use. You'll definitely get more vibe and sound on the 3340, but bouncing and overdubbing on that deck is a chore. Those sync switches on the front are also finicky in my experience. Way more vibe and punchy sound than the 38 though.
 
chillward said:
Also you talked about recording the mono signal with a 4-Track. Let me try to ask this question: If I'd record the drums on each 4 Tracks - 2 OH on Track 1, Snare on 2, Kick on 3 and let's say directs on the toms on 4 then converting to the DAW then rolling the Tape back and overdubbing / erasing the 4 Drum Tracks on the Tape but not on the DAW then recording the guitar / bass / Vocals in the same procedure, wouldn't that give me an infinit amount of tracks or am I living in a dreamy bubble world?
Click to expand...

There's several ways to do it. What I think you're proposing is recording 4 tracks on tape, copying them to the DAW and then recording 4 more tracks. You'd probably want to keep one of them or copy the DAW mix to track 1 so you have a guide track. You'll also have to line up the tracks in the DAW and the timing won't be perfect because the machine speed will vary slightly.

There are all-analogue ways to do this - you could mix your 4 tracks down to track 1 of a second 4-track machine, which is what the Beatles tended to do. You could mix it down to a wide-track deck, e.g. a 1/4" stereo machine and then copy that to a new section of your 4-track tape (and thereby avoid erasing the original bed tracks). This will allow you to get lots of tracks but you'll also get a lot of tape hiss. I did this on my EP for the 4-track challenge.

Or you could do internal bouncing, i.e. record 3 tracks, mix them to track 4, record tracks 1 and 2, mix that pair to track three and then use tracks 1 and 2 as normal. The disadvantage is that you can't go back and fix anything because you've erased the original. There can also be crosstalk issues copying from a track to one immediately next to it.
 
jpmorris said:
T
Or you could do internal bouncing, i.e. record 3 tracks, mix them to track 4, record tracks 1 and 2, mix that pair to track three and then use tracks 1 and 2 as normal. The disadvantage is that you can't go back and fix anything because you've erased the original. There can also be crosstalk issues copying from a track to one immediately next to it.
Click to expand...

Yeah thought about this a lot. Once read that you can even record while bouncing the 3 tracks to 4 so you have 4 tracks on 1. Is that possible with reel to reel? Only did it with cassette yet. One thing I don't really get is panning with reel to reels. When you pan Track 1 to L on the machine and then mix it can you put that Track to slightly R or even fully R?

BTW checked out your Project, really like it! Very interesting sounds!
 
lonewhitefly said:
My opinion is the 3340 sounds better but the 38 will be WAY easier to use. You'll definitely get more vibe and sound on the 3340, but bouncing and overdubbing on that deck is a chore. Those sync switches on the front are also finicky in my experience. Way more vibe and punchy sound than the 38 though.
Click to expand...

Yeah I heard the Pre's on the 3340 are amazing. Can't wait to hear them for myself. It really is a tough decision for me but thanks for sharing your thoughts!
 
chillward said:
Yeah thought about this a lot. Once read that you can even record while bouncing the 3 tracks to 4 so you have 4 tracks on 1. Is that possible with reel to reel? Only did it with cassette yet. One thing I don't really get is panning with reel to reels. When you pan Track 1 to L on the machine and then mix it can you put that Track to slightly R or even fully R?

BTW checked out your Project, really like it! Very interesting sounds!
Click to expand...

Totally possible on reel, but one of the challenges of the 3340 is the sync response is lousy, so bouncing while overdubbing is not a great option.

Panning and routing for bouncing is a function of the mixer, though the 3340 has a pseudo-mixer section. Basically you take the individual outputs on the recorder and route them however you want on your mixer (assign 3 of them to a buss for instance, then take the out from that buss and route it to the input of an open track on the reel deck).
 
chillward said:
BTW checked out your Project, really like it! Very interesting sounds!
Click to expand...

Thanks. Which one was it? The first few albums were done entirely on a TSR-8. Later on I had two of them running in sync. That made mixdown a chore so eventually I upgraded to a 24-track machine, but I'm still using the same old TSR-8 to record the vocals and bass because I love its automatic punch-in features.
 
lonewhitefly said:
Totally possible on reel, but one of the challenges of the 3340 is the sync response is lousy, so bouncing while overdubbing is not a great option.

Panning and routing for bouncing is a function of the mixer, though the 3340 has a pseudo-mixer section. Basically you take the individual outputs on the recorder and route them however you want on your mixer (assign 3 of them to a buss for instance, then take the out from that buss and route it to the input of an open track on the reel deck).
Click to expand...

Didn't know that with the sync response, thanks for that! okay but still I can bounce tracks and get more tracks. I thought you can only pan hard left and right on these old things so that's good. But it is also possible to hook up the mixer and record the channels through the mixer so I get more than 4 channels per track as inputs? And does it chance the quality of the signal when recording through the mixer into the machine?
 
jpmorris said:
Thanks. Which one was it? The first few albums were done entirely on a TSR-8. Later on I had two of them running in sync. That made mixdown a chore so eventually I upgraded to a 24-track machine, but I'm still using the same old TSR-8 to record the vocals and bass because I love its automatic punch-in features.
Click to expand...

I checked out the first song on the Heresiarch's Breakfast. The Snare sound is really interesting and I liked the song structre. Is every instrument played by you? Which 24 Track machine are you using? Are you using DAW or strictly analog when recording? Who long have you got the TSR-8 and did you have any repair issues? Read a lot about small missfunctions on a 38 which seem to appear every 6-12 months to some people. I don't really want a machine that has to go through lots of service yet, maybe later but for now I want a workhorse.
 
chillward said:
I checked out the first song on the Heresiarch's Breakfast. The Snare sound is really interesting and I liked the song structre. Is every instrument played by you? Which 24 Track machine are you using? Are you using DAW or strictly analog when recording? Who long have you got the TSR-8 and did you have any repair issues? Read a lot about small missfunctions on a 38 which seem to appear every 6-12 months to some people. I don't really want a machine that has to go through lots of service yet, maybe later but for now I want a workhorse.
Click to expand...

It's an Otari MX80. I have this 1980s synthpop approach to recording in that I have a large collection of synthesizers and a drum machine which are controlled by a MIDI sequencer, but the recording itself is entirely analogue.
So, I compose the entire song on computer first, using the piano roll view to drag and drop notes like lego blocks. When I'm happy with it, I record a timecode on the tape deck, on track 24, so that when I play it back the timing and song position is sent to the computer and it knows whereabouts in the song it is. This means that I can then overdub the instruments one by one, and build up the song on tape that way. The bass and vocals, the bits which I perform myself (badly), are recorded on the TSR-8. Again, I'll put a timecode on track 8, and record a guide track on track 1 - all the key instruments smushed into a single mono channel, usually with a prominent click track.
When I'm happy with the vocals and bass, or any other things like reverse tape effects that require a lot of attempts, I use a synchronizer to lock the TSR-8 and MX-80 together, and copy those tracks to the MX-80.

For mixdown, I'll play the MX-80 back through a GL2400 mixing desk and record onto a Studer A807 1/4" machine. If I fluff parts of the mixdown I will sometimes do it in sections and razor-edit them together - more recently I've been designing the songs in sections so they HAVE to be edited together. 'Red Queen Rising' on last year's album 'Evil songs for evil people' was a good example of that, there was a segment in the middle which was done using an old Akai deck playing a single sustained note, with me hitting the speed switch to make it jump octaves. It had this wonderful slurring sound to it because the machine didn't lock up immediately - the Studer and Otari had these last-generation digital capstan servos and were too good at their job for special effects.

Yeah, the entire thing could be done using a single laptop ro run a DAW and softsynths. But it's more fun this way, and having the synthesizers all done in hardware (or running on dedicated Rasperry Pis) means I can work in Windows, OSX or Linux as I choose.
at some point
EDIT: As for the TSR-8, that's been a real workhorse. I have a backup machine and a stash of parts, but the original deck I got off ebay in 2003 has been trucking along with no major problems so far (or maintenance either, I'm ashamed to say). I need to change the belt at some point and early on there was a problem with the tension arm seizing up, but otherwise it's great. I can't promise that a '38 will be this well-behaved, of course.
 
Last edited:
Sorry I didn't replay that quick, busy week! Perfect, and very interesting with your project! That TSR-8 sounds really nice man! I am gonna check out some older stuff from your project when I got some time.
As for the Audio Interfaces - how do you do it which one do you use? I was researching couple of Interfaces and SMPTE Time Code Devices like the JL Cooper PPS-2 (is this also a audio interface or just a time code device?) Again another question arose. If I am not trying to record with a time code then should be every audio interface capable of transfering the individual Tracks to my DAW? So I am done recording everything to the 8-Track lets say and then I want to transfer each Track individual to the DAW and then only EQing, Compressing on the DAW then I wont need a time code device, or am I false?

Mixer Update: I am looking at a Tascam M216 - any experiences, thoughts with that? It only has 4 Stereo Busses but I researched it and I think you can put Track 1&5 on one stereo buss I heard but how does this work with fading?

Thanks again!
 
For audio interfaces, it's probably best for someone else to answer that. I used a Terratec Phase88 for a while, mostly to digitize the 8-track tapes for backup purposes. That didn't scale once I got the MSR-24 and later the Otari, so I sold it on. I also had a lot of problems keeping the computer happy. Windows would glitch regularly. Linux was better but over the years it started to bug out as well so I moved the whole thing to outboard. For digitizing the stereo master tape, I use a TASCAM DA3000. There are cheaper models available, but I was curious about recording on DSD rather than PCM. The DA3000 will record to SD or CF card, so I can just stick that into the computer and copy the files off. It's also possible to use it as a direct audio interface I think, but I've never tried that. For the 24-track tapes, I managed to snag a cheap JoeCo 24-track live recorder (can't do punch-ins) and I just play the entire 24-track tape into that to digitize it. That records to a USB disk (recently replaced with a memory stick) which again, I can plug into the computer to copy the files off.

A timecode comes in handy when you're locking the computer and tape deck together (or locking multiple tape decks together). AFAIK the PPS-2 is just a timecode device - it will let the computer chase the tape deck. There are also synchronizers which can use the timecode to lock the tape deck to the computer (or another deck), but the PPS-2 can't do that. Also it requires that the tape deck be able to slave to an external controller and I don't believe the 38 is able to do this.

If you're only planning to record things on the '38 and transfer them to the DAW for mixing, yeah, you won't need one since you can re-align the tracks individually inside the editor. Synchronizers only become important when you're sending things from the computer onto tape and need it to line up with existing tracks.

As for the mixer, I've never had that model and mixing desks are a bit of a can of worms anyway since there's so many types and ways of working.
What I did to begin with was get two cheap 8-channel mixers. One of them took the 7 outputs of the tape deck and mixed them down to stereo (the 8th track being the timecode). The other mixer was connected to the synthesizers and microphone preamp, and reduced those to stereo. I had a 4-way stereo switch which I used for routing, so that I could record on tracks 1&2, 3&4, 5&6 or 7. I didn't need to record more than two tracks at once, but it was useful to add EQ or echo during recording, and of course to mix two synthesizers together on the same track since I only had 7 to play with.

A patchbay is the other way to do this, or if you have a really big desk which supports multiple output groups, you can do that - e.g. send group 1 to 1&2, group 2 to 3&4, group 3 to 5&6, and group 4 to 7&8, which I think is what you were alluding to on the M216. With the 24-track I use a 24-channel patchbay with 7 inputs coming out of the TSR-8 - that way, I can put the TSR-8 into ALL-INPUT mode to to act as a passthrough, or I can make it play back into the Otari for things which need lots of punch-ins or tape trickery.

If you have a recording desk (which I don't) it's possible to use the same deck both as a front-end for recording, and for mixdown afterwards. I think some people also use a large desk for that, say using the first 8 channels to record into the tape deck, and the last 8 channels to mix the return from the tape deck. I've never done that either since until fairly recently they were out of my reach.
Hope that helps...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top