HOLY CRAP!!! Tascam introduces the 2488!!!

The Ghost of FM said:
I'm an analog user by nature.

I have a 16 track reel to reel and a 24 channel mixing desk at my disposal.

What is this "sub-mix" scenario that you refer to?

Does it mean you can only access a certain number of faders at any given moment and have to dive into a menu to get to the others? If so, why do they design it that way? It seems counter productive to seeing an entire picture of what's happening and saving a few bucks on a compromised design.

I wonder when digital recording will be inexpensive enough that they can design complete work surfaces that give you all the controls like a decent analog system would give you?

You would think that they have been at it long enough at this point to do that and not have it cost the price of a typical SSL console which would give the engineer this type of usability level.

Cheers! :)
Click to expand...

I'll have to look at a photo but it's probably 12 and 6, 12 faders controlling 12 tracks and 6 faders controlling 2 stereo tracks each.
 
Having owned a Teac 4 track reel, an 8 track Tascam 388, and for a very short while the 788, I'd say I was a dedicated Tascam user. Well, until the 788. I know lots of 788 users swear by that machine, but for me, it wasn't the right choice. I found it difficult to maneuver through, prone to crashes, hard to burn a cd, and very limiting in actual faders (without the sub thing). Effects were impossible for me to comprehend. It got to the point where I felt disabled to digital recording. So, I sold it and bought something else. Made all the difference in the world.

Now, Tascam comes out with something new. Again, it looks like the same configuration with more faders. Being fair, I do need to look at the machine, but I'm glad I didn't wait for this one. The first deal killer for me is the lack of 1/4" input jacks. I need more than four at any given time. I don't want to plug and play all day. Also, just curious as to why they chose only a 3 band eq when the competitors are offering 4 band? I heard mention to the lack of scenes, is this true? Are the faders automated? I guess this remains to be seen.

I'm sure this is a great improvement to the 788. I do hope they improved on the plastic case. I don't mind the stereo pairs. Having 12 mono's is good enough for my needs. I'm still fuzzy on the fx and several other issues. Time will tell. I do believe I'll keep what I've got.
 
it "looks" like:

12 MONO faders (tracks 1-12, obviously)

6 STEREO faders (tracks 13/14, 15/16, 17/18, 19/20, 21/22, 23/24)

1 ADDITIONAL fader (which "appears" to be dedicated to FX returns or perhaps the onboard tone module) and..........

1 MASTER fader

i sure wish it had a few dedicated knobs (like a cluster of knobs which were dedicated to controlling pan, eq, fx paremeters, etc).
spinning that ONE data knob to control 24-tracks-worth of ALL those parameters could be quite a headache. STILL, i'm kinda curious to actually see one of these. cheers.
 
R Z said:
It got to the point where I felt disabled to digital recording. So, I sold it and bought something else. Made all the difference in the world.
Click to expand...

R Z, what did you finally go with that brought digital recording peace? Just curious.

vp
 
I think I gotta have one of these, My 788 is less than 3 months old, Good thing I only paid 456.00 for it brand new and 99.00 for the 788CDRW. I wish I would have known they were coming out with the 2488. Maybe I can sync the 2488 and 788 and have 32 tracks.
 
songsj said:
I think I gotta have one of these, My 788 is less than 3 months old, Good thing I only paid 456.00 for it brand new and 99.00 for the 788CDRW. I wish I would have known they were coming out with the 2488. Maybe I can sync the 2488 and 788 and have 32 tracks.
Click to expand...

Good question. I've got two hard drives worth of stuff I'd like to transfer, if the 2488 can do it, I'll get it.
 
jake-owa said:
Very good point!

Bad TASACM!

The box looks nice I guess, this stuff is kinda standard though. I guess I am just bored with the digital revolution.
Click to expand...

WARNING: What you will find below are just the opinions of yours truly. Nothing less, nothing more. For those easily offended, proceed with extreme caution! ;) :D :D :D :D :D

You got that right: "standard". That's exactly what it is. It is nothing more than TASCAM having a "me too" product. Sorry guys, if you like to record on these boxes, but what a boring and frustrating way to record. :rolleyes:

Guys, get yourself an in good condition series 30, 40 or 50 TASCAM reel to reel machine, or even perhaps an MS-16, with a nice m30, m200, m300 or m500 series mixer with some dx-4d dbx noise reduction (optional) or a nice 388 or TSR-8 and some accessories, for dirt cheap now, and make better sounding recordings as they were meant to be! Lets skip this whole digital "hoopla" over DAW's etc ... and get along recording the only time tested and best way. Trust me, ANALOG will make a comeback and will be the first choice for tracking. Digital has its place but it's just mostly a big over-rated commercially driven enterprise. Has nothing to do with quality. Record like a real man for God's sakes! (Whew .... have to calm down ......... ;) ).

No offence to you "digital" folks, really .... ;) ;) :) :)

Daniel
 
Daniel,

That brings up a good point. I wonder how much of my life has been lost to rewind and tape spliceing.

I'd also like to thank the Ampex company for their tape turing into gum after 30 years and ruining about half of my archived material. Who knew that Sctoch 150 was bullet proof.

Too bad I threw out all the bad reels 5 years ago, for while doing a radio thing last Saturday I learned that if you run the bad tape on to metal reels you can bake 'em on low in the oven and usually get it back.

No analog for me in any form, thanks.
 
philboyd studge said:
Daniel,

That brings up a good point. I wonder how much of my life has been lost to rewind and tape spliceing.

I'd also like to thank the Ampex company for their tape turing into gum after 30 years and ruining about half of my archived material. Who knew that Sctoch 150 was bullet proof.

Too bad I threw out all the bad reels 5 years ago, for while doing a radio thing last Saturday I learned that if you run the bad tape on to metal reels you can bake 'em on low in the oven and usually get it back.

No analog for me in any form, thanks.
Click to expand...

Yeah, rewinding does take its toll ..:rolleyes: ;) . Spliceing is a non-issue for most. 30 years of recording is a lifetime for most. Even then, this could have been prevented by proper care, storage methods and backing up. Nevertheless, these are "small potatos" compared to issues I have with digital. Now, gon't get me started on that! ;)

Daniel
 
Last edited:
vaporpark said:
R Z, what did you finally go with that brought digital recording peace? Just curious.

vp
Click to expand...

Sorry for the delay in replying. I went to the Yamaha AW16G. It has 8 mono tracks which are perfect for recording my vocals and main instruments. The 4 stereo pair are great for keyboard, stereo drums and stereo guitar tracks. Granted it's a 16 bit recorder, but for my needs, 16 bit is plenty. In fact with the 788, I only recorded in 16 bit.

A few other things were the 4 band eq, seperate compression for each track, easy input to track routing, 2 easy to use fx, and the built in cdrw (of course at the time it was a unique feature).

But the best part of the AW16G is the users forum. It was created by a user and really supports the daw with help from 100's of other users. Having this kind of help group is an invaluable resource and compliment to the machine.
 
Tascam's just a second rate "me too" company, and this proves it.

The 2488 is no more than a Roland VS-2400CD clone, and the VS-2400CD was so two-years-ago!

Where's the innovation?

[Ask Roland, not Tascam].;)
 
Re: Tascam's just a second rate "me too" company, and this proves it.

A Reel Person said:
The 2488 is no more than a Roland VS-2400CD clone, and the VS-2400CD was so two-years-ago!

Where's the innovation?

[Ask Roland, not Tascam].;)
Click to expand...

Actually, with the MIDI TG, this thing is more like four PocketStudio 5's velcro'd together.
 
baked

per philboyd studge

Too bad I threw out all the bad reels 5 years ago, for while doing a radio thing last Saturday I learned that if you run the bad tape on to metal reels you can bake 'em on low in the oven and usually get it back.
Click to expand...


hey philboyd,
funny you should mention that. i read an article recently where an artist "unearthed" a bunch of home recordings he'd tracked on a Teac 3340 (or something similar). the tapes had been stored in a shoebox for some 20-odd years and were in bad shape. his idea was to remix the tapes to CD but the tapes had deteriorated to such a state that they virtually "melted" on the heads during playback (after all those years of sitting STAGNANT). he transferred the tapes to metal reels and "baked" them,.....LITERALLY... in an oven. it actually took a couple of tries but FINALLY he was able to get ONE good pass over the heads and sent the signals to his computer for cleanup, mixing and mastering. the end result was VERY impressive. through the use of extensive mastering software the original recordings CAME TO LIFE and sounded as if they had been recorded the "day before". pretty cool, i think. who says that analog and digital technologies can't CO-EXIST and BENEFIT each other??!!?? i was impressed. ANYWAY,..just thought you'd like to know. cheers.:)
 
Re: baked

Cratinus said:
per philboyd studge




hey philboyd,
funny you should mention that. i read an article recently where an artist "unearthed" a bunch of home recordings he'd tracked on a Teac 3340 (or something similar). the tapes had been stored in a shoebox for some 20-odd years and were in bad shape. his idea was to remix the tapes to CD but the tapes had deteriorated to such a state that they virtually "melted" on the heads during playback (after all those years of sitting STAGNANT). he transferred the tapes to metal reels and "baked" them,.....LITERALLY... in an oven. it actually took a couple of tries but FINALLY he was able to get ONE good pass over the heads and sent the signals to his computer for cleanup, mixing and mastering. the end result was VERY impressive. through the use of extensive mastering software the original recordings CAME TO LIFE and sounded as if they had been recorded the "day before". pretty cool, i think. who says that analog and digital technologies can't CO-EXIST and BENEFIT each other??!!?? i was impressed. ANYWAY,..just thought you'd like to know. cheers.:)
Click to expand...

That's just about what I heard from my friend Joey who in his spare time runs Radio Free World http://www.radiofreeworld.com/
.......I wonder who thought of baking tape? Anyway, he's done it and it works. Just don't bake the plastic reels.

I didn't throw out any 10" 2 track masters but I did toss a lot of live and rehersal tapes which were priceless to me. Wish I would have known.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top