Teac 3340s

[Golden]

There's a guy in my area selling a TEAC 3340S 4-track in mint condition for $350 canadian. Is that a good deal? Are these machines good quality?... compared to my R8?

[Dr ZEE]

Originally Posted by Golden

There's a guy in my area selling a TEAC 3340S 4-track in mint condition for $350 canadian. Is that a good deal?

if mint condition = perfect, then YES.

Originally Posted by Golden

Are these machines good quality?

Yes. (Not "are", but rathere "were" ) Good thing is that some of them still around and kicking, and their Good quality is one of the reasons why

Originally Posted by Golden

...compared to my R8?

I have no clue.

/respects

[cjacek]

Originally Posted by Golden

There's a guy in my area selling a TEAC 3340S 4-track in mint condition for $350 canadian. Is that a good deal? Are these machines good quality?... compared to my R8?

Don't take the guy's word for it and check the machine out for yourself. If it's faultless in both function and appearance then yes, as the good Doc already said, it's worth the 350 CND.

Be sure to carefully check the tape path for signs of wear and any oxidation present outside and also inside the unit. I'd have the seller take off the back. I'd also pass a couple of signals through the recorder, both through its amps and also printed to tape.

You will need to get it serviced though for optimum performance but that's just to be expected for a 30 year old unit. Motors will need to be oiled, capstan belt and pinch roller replaced and ideally the capstan linkage relubed, not to mention level and bias adjusted. Still, if you're satisfied with the way it works and sounds, "as is", then at least replace the belt and pinch roller and use it till you find the time / money for servicing the unit properly and fully.

The quality of a well performing 3340S is rather excellent, including its built and a big, robust and detailed sound. I think it's of much better built and sound quality than an R8 Fostex, having heard both. The TEAC, though, is much older so the age thing may be a factor.

[The Ghost of FM]

I used to own a second hand 3340S back in the 80's and found it to be a very good sounding recorder but there were a few drawbacks to it's design that latter models corrected.

The two biggest gripes I had about mine were was the siml-sync switching arrangement where you had to throw a number of switches in the head stack assembly and on the face plate of the deck to overdub a track because you have to manually change the monitoring switches for each track where future models like the 3440 introduced more complex relay switching that reduced an 8 switch arrangement down to 4 with the more modern input/sync/repro master switching arrangement.

The second issue was that while overdubbing, the all ready recorded tracks would sound quite muddy compared to when you straight out played them back for mix-down. This was because the sync response was not equal to the repro response...this too was corrected in newer models.

There were also some convenience features missing like an automated RTZ or STC tape search so it's going to more of a hands on kind of machine requiring more work on your part to keep the wind in its sails. Speaking of sailboats, they have the advantage of avoiding gas stations. The 3340 also has the ability to avoid repair stations because of its simpler design.

Cheers!

[Golden]

Interesting... I've been told, and I suppose it's true, that 4-track machines are better sonically than 8-tracks on 1/4" tape...? Thus, I've been keeping my eye out for a 4-track. I have my eye on a TASCAM 34 as well.

Nonetheless, I'm finding ways to make my R8 sound "sonically pleasing", so to speak. Which is encouraging... The R8 is proving itself to me, in a sense.

Using the R8 has been kind of like finding the shape in the ivory.

So, I'm kinda in the middle, with the R8 on the right and the 4-track on the left.

This information is great!

[dementedchord]

i had one back in (i think it was)'75... boy we thought we were hot... it's actually a pretty solid machine... there was the drag about the simulsync switching as mentioned... as to better than an 1/4" 8 trk ?? marginally....
the width of the track does help a little here... as i recall there was a small problem with the motor switch/engage... the main upgrade in the 3440 was to go to a solenoid based system IIRC... have fun...

[Tim Gillett]

Originally Posted by The Ghost of FM

The second issue was that while overdubbing, the all ready recorded tracks would sound quite muddy compared to when you straight out played them back for mix-down. This was because the sync response was not equal to the repro response...this too was corrected in newer models.

Cheers!

I have the later 3440 and its sync sound is also limited in bandwidth, maybe 5khz. No big deal. You're only using the simul sync function to hear the track and keep in time with it. So, as far as I know it's no different to the 3340 in that respect.
But otherwise agree with Ghost. Both good solid machines. Watch out for worn heads.
Tim

[Golden]

Originally Posted by dementedchord

... as to better than an 1/4" 8 trk ?? marginally...

Interesting... I thought 4-tracks on 1/4" we far superior than 8...

To everyone out there... Can anyone name a 1/4" 4-track that is sonically superior to the R8? Something in the the same price range?

[The Ghost of FM]

Originally Posted by Golden

Interesting... I thought 4-tracks on 1/4" we far superior than 8...

To everyone out there... Can anyone name a 1/4" 4-track that is sonically superior to the R8? Something in the the same price range?

I owned an R8 for a couple of years back in the mid 90's and found mine lacking detail and range and is why I sold it and got a TASCAM 38 with the matching dbx NR units and found that to be a much better sounding recorder, sounding fuller with better highs and more headroom.

A TASCAM 34 or 44, in proper shape and calibration should be able to produce a clearly superior quality recording compared to a Fostex 8 track 1/4" deck.

As far as the price issue, that's pretty variable on the used market.

Cheers!

[Golden]

Well, I've got my eye on a TRS-8. I'm assuming that this will be a significant upgrade from the R8?

Thanks!

[dementedchord]

so ya want to quibble with marginally verses far... at the speed they run at for my money it's marginal... add some NR at the same speed still marginal diff... YMMV...

[Golden]

Originally Posted by dementedchord

YMMV...

what does this mean? Sorry, I'm not up to date on the speak!

Anyway, I hear what you're saying... Others have made a few suggestions... Have you used an R8? Any thoughts?... Cuz I agree with Ghost, the R8 is shit! Should I continue recording on shit? or maybe get a better machine? or are they all shit?

[Tim Gillett]

I felt the R8 was sort of lightly built, with those belt driven reels which were just waiting to wear out the belts, but with 8 tracks on 1/4" I thought it was a nifty little package.

The dull sound thing , as so often discussed here, is probably the need for a line up. As I remember it had permanent Dolby C and it is very harsh on any slight record/play misalignment, or even a trace of dirt on the head.
Probably a head clean and demag followed by bias and level adjustments to the tape type you are using will make it sing again.

Cheers Tim

[Beck]

Originally Posted by Golden

Well, I've got my eye on a TRS-8. I'm assuming that this will be a significant upgrade from the R8?

Thanks!

Yes it will. The TSR-8 is a super machine with the same heads and format as the TASCAM 38.