Tascam M-30 or Fostex 450 for Tascam TSR-8

K

kenny_k

New member
I just picked up my first reel-to-reel - a Tascam TSR-8 fully serviced. Now I'm looking into analog mixer to work with it.

I don't need anything too fancy. Right now I'm looking at the Tascam M-30 and the Fostex 450 because they're each $100 in my area's CL. I'm hoping to spend around $100 but up to $200 on a mixer. Which of these would you choose? Or is there another similarly priced board that would be better to look out for?

Ultimately I'm hoping to get these tracks to Pro Tools, which I was originally going to do using a friend's PreSonus digital rack interface, unless someone can recommend a great analog or digital 8-track interface (can be more than $200) that has usb or thunderbolt output that I can use for both the tracking and the digitization that will keep the warm analog sound.

What should I do?
 
Of those two, the Fostex 450 has a lot more going for it, namely phantom power and a bit more modern routing and sub mixing systems. Sound-wise, I'm not sure if it will sound any better or worse then the M-30...never used one.

Hopefully, some other folks can chime in on your other questions or fill in more details on the Fostex, sound wide.



Cheers! :)
 
I'm using a Tascam US-1641 connected to my Tascam tsr-8 and my computer--- to transfer
my old Ampex 456 tapes to computer. IMO if your recording straight analog
get the Tascam M-30. To keep things sounding warm and analog I
make sure that my waves Studer j-37 pluggin is on every Cubase 7 channel
after the transfer.

Jack :guitar:
 
I did a Google on the tascam. It pointed to a thread on this forum with lots of info on the mixer by guess who?
The ghost.

I cant link it but it's easy to find.

Me I've always liked tascam stuff better than fostex. I had the fostex unit for about 4 hours, never used it. Just made sure it worked and flipped it.

So im no help.
:-)
 
Thanks everyone! I think I'm leaning towards the Tascam despite the lack of phantom power. That being said does the Tascam have send and return like the Fostex? Just want to make sure I'll be able to switch between recording and monitoring on all 8 tracks.

Any other vintage or newer analog (or digital but analog or transparent sounding) boards I should be looking at? None of the new boards available at Guitar Center etc. seem to excite me but maybe I'm missing out on one?
 
I have a Tascam M520 Board. Actually I have 2, being the greedy bastard I am. :D I love them. There's lots of info on this forum

The smaller version is the M512, which would be perfect for 8 track. Both are 8 buss boards with a LOT of routing, patching, effects versatility.

The 512 is a 12 channel 8 buss and the 520 is a 20 channel console. Both have full phantom power.
 
I've heard of the M512. I think for my space and what I need (mostly simple clean tracking with minimal to no effects) the size of the M-30 would work better and I may not miss the added features for now. BUT would the sound be comparable?
 
I'm an M30 user and advocate.

I saw a Fostex 450 at the thrift store and was not impressed. Some people prefer Fostex but to me it looked like junk.

Functionally the 450 is about the same as the M30, but I wasn't on board with the 'either A-B or C-D' buss assignment matrix, (if I recall correctly). What about assigning to 1-4 busses independently (with caveats) on the M30? Phantom power isn't a deal maker or breaker in my situation, either way.

Fostex was usually a lighter "me-too" version of heavier-duty, better, similar Tascam equipment. Functional, but no frills & some of their application of design was clunky. Fostex couldn't copy outright some of the most elegant design points of Tascams, but they wanted to play in the same sandbox.

However, Fostex had some true gems of products that Tascam could never answer, but the 450 mixer wasn't one of them.

YMMV.

:spank::eek:;)
 
...

The M30 mixer has adequate switching architecture to switch between recording, monitoring, dubbing and mixing.

The M30 does not have top panel sends & receives, but it has adequate SND>RCV patch points on every channel and buss. However, these patch points have no bearing on the switching functions between Input/Tape/Main/Mon/Submix. The architecture of this sleek board must be used to fully understand. I'll cut a little to the chase & say the "traffic center" of the board is the Submix section, with which you can monitor tape tracks and input channels simultaneously during the overdub phase of recording. ... ... As well as the M30 do about 100 different things that's not explained in this post.

The M30 was designed with and to support the Tascam 38. If the question is 'is it adequate?', the answer is 'yes'. To do everything you need but is prohibitive to try to explain it all in a post.

Will a Fostex 450 support a Tascam 38? Of course, but it will be a clunky misfit solution.

:spank::eek:;)
 
A Reel Person said:
I saw a Fostex 450 at the thrift store and was not impressed. Some people prefer Fostex but to me it looked like junk.
Click to expand...

That was my impression as well. Although I got it from a client who owed money to resell, there's always the hope that an item proves useful.

However next to the m520 it was like a toy.

I love some of the fostex co-ax drivers and the 1/2 inch 16 track is pretty nice, but the mixer didn't fit into that category.


The info on the mixer you gave is good, and hopefully we will see a NMD thread.

;-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top