sweetbeats
Reel deep thoughts...
My 2 pence as somebody who has owned three 388s, and done a complete tear-down refurb on one, and also have experience with the 1/2" 8-track format (Tascam 48 and 58) as well as a wide format 1"-2" Ampex machine...
I think the draw to the 388 is:
1. There is nothing else like it...exclusivity often breeds magic rainbow unicorn lore
2. It does look cool...Tascam made some handsome equipment in the early to late 80s IMO
3. Certain artists/bands with a something of a cult following have used them on their recordings...I think Black Keys was the first band I heard about that used a 388...
So, to recap, it looks cool, its unique, and that band that sounds cool used one and therefore it *must* be the reason the band sounds cool, even though it probably has very little to do with the end product. I'd wager much of the "sound" associated with the 388 is attributable to the recording process...the mics, the room...people having to beg/borrow/scratch/claw for mics and space to rehearse/record, and to be brutally honest I'd also wager much of the time the recordings are being done on a 388 that's not properly setup, particularly with the bias. A lot of people don't even know what bias is and even less how to set it, and not just in a factory sense but even creatively to take advantage of the format and the tape being used. And to make matters worse the 388 manual doesn't present a feedback methodology for setting the bias...it simply directs the operator/tech to set the bias amp output for each track to a fixed voltage. That doesn't take into account different tape brands and formulations and yes it matters. For instance LPR35 requires about 2/3 the bias level than 457. So most people, unless they've read my posts on this, will set the bias amps to 150mVAC regardless of the tape, and if they are using LPR35 that will be a significantly over biased situation which equals what? Diminished HF response..."lo-fi"...cooooooool. This can also be jacked up pretty good when you load some +9 tape or ATR tape on the 388, which a lot of people do thinking they'll get that phat bitchin' tape compression not realizing they are actually setting bar further away from saturating the tape, the 388 amps can't really drive super high output tape to saturation before they start breaking up (but maybe that's part of the "sound"), and you wouldn't want to hit it hard anyway because then you're going to have tracking issues with the dbx...but...maybe that's yet another factor in the "sound". If people want to run their 388 that way more power to them, I think where I take exception is they often don't understand what it means to or how to dial the machine in to factory spec, which then gives you a reference point for deviation and experimentation, but I think a lot of operators don't really know what they are doing, or how far off-track they are from maximizing the 388 toward their sort of intangible subjective goal. And their ears will believe anything, even if what sounds good is, at least in part, the results of overbias, line amps clipping and dbx mis-tracking. And it accentuates the issue that the 388 runs at 7.5ips and so has some pretty decent LF response for such a narrow format...the decent LF response accentuates, for instance, the poor HF response of an overbias situation. I wish I had the opportunity to step into a situation where a 388 is being used and run tone ladders and see where the response is. I bet in a number of cases the curve would be face-ditching at 12-14kHz. But the LF response may also be part of the "sound" people talk about, which, as has been pointed out, may be achievable in 1/2" 8-track format at 7.5ips, but that's maybe a bit of a generalization, because its also about the head coil profile and where the head bump sits in the response curve, so maybe there is actually a "sound" to the 388, but that sound is fidelity limited by the format and how I believe a lot of 388s are being setup...and that's the lo-fi sound. My personal experience? When setup to factory spec and setting the bias appropriately to the tape being used? The 388 does have a nice sound, decent HF response and good LF response, but I'm speaking relative to what you might expect from a machine that has the same track width as 4-track cassette...yes...the 388 is essentially a double 4-track cassette machine running at 7.5ips with a better mixing section than most cassette multitrack machines, but honestly the signal path is very garden variety on the 388 mixing section. It sounds better than 4-track cassette, but that's because its running at 7.5ips as opposed to the typical 3.75ips...its not the mixing section...the 246 is comparable. Its mostly TL072 based. I'm not knocking that, it is just very straight-forward, nothing remarkable happening circuit-wise in the 388. The M-300 series consoles were discussed above...they are actually significantly different from the 388 mixing section...lots of 5532s in the M-300 mixers. I like their sound much better than the 388 mixing section, but for vastly overgrown cassette multitrack the 388 is comparably better than its cassette-based cousins. But yes...you are going to have much more freedom to achieve different results with a standalone mixer and a 1/2" 8-track machine. You want lo-fi on a 388 or a 1/2" 8-track machine? Forget +9 tape or even +6 tape...I'd try calibrating it at 250mWb/m but use a +3 tape...now you'll get some saturation but have a much better chance at letting the dbx do its thing...and I'd mess with the bias, even setting it up differently for different tracks depending on the source.
Anyway...I digress.
So I've owned three of them...the first one was the one that got the full tear-down refurb...and I sold it without a second thought. Why? The 388 is not a robust machine physically. You have to take some care when moving it. You have to take great care when plugging or unplugging module bay cards to avoid breaking/bending card edge connector pins or connector housings themselves...they are prone to solder joint failures. They are prone to a couple logic system failures. I've seen a fair amount with transport logic issues and all the guts are intertwined...its a challenge to suss problems out on them because they are a physical PITA to work on if you've got to do anything beyond basic maintenance stuff...and they DO go bad...but the biggest reason? Replacement record/play heads are unobtanium. All of that put together, my *personal* experience, leaves me scratching my head at what people are paying for these things these days...388s are NOT getting more reliable with age...but I get it...they really are cool looking and they are unique...nothing else exactly like them...so I get it. But they are not a secret sonic treasure trove...they are limited...they sound nice...but you can get "nice" in a lot of ways, and I prefer using equipment that isn't fragile and on its way to extinction eventually. Consider this...there are LOTS of bands...LOTS and LOTS of them with an indie sound, and only a few call out using the 388. Do I sound like I'm being disparaging toward the 388? I'm sorry...I don't intend to...I really like a lot of Tascam stuff from the 1980s, and I do think the 388 is cool, but its because it has a visual allure and is unique...I respect that...and Teac did a nice job with it, but at 30+ years old they are not aging well. I would take an M-308 with a 38 and pair of DX-4Ds all day long over a 388...save my money and have a more reliable setup with a broader range of possibilities.
And if you're wondering why I'm saying all these things and yet have owned three 388s? I got #2 and #3 on the cheap...non-functioning with issues, put some love into them in order to flip them and help pay some bills...and I enjoyed working on them and bringing back their luster...putting some bills in my pocket while offering a happy buyer a good deal.
I think the draw to the 388 is:
1. There is nothing else like it...exclusivity often breeds magic rainbow unicorn lore
2. It does look cool...Tascam made some handsome equipment in the early to late 80s IMO
3. Certain artists/bands with a something of a cult following have used them on their recordings...I think Black Keys was the first band I heard about that used a 388...
So, to recap, it looks cool, its unique, and that band that sounds cool used one and therefore it *must* be the reason the band sounds cool, even though it probably has very little to do with the end product. I'd wager much of the "sound" associated with the 388 is attributable to the recording process...the mics, the room...people having to beg/borrow/scratch/claw for mics and space to rehearse/record, and to be brutally honest I'd also wager much of the time the recordings are being done on a 388 that's not properly setup, particularly with the bias. A lot of people don't even know what bias is and even less how to set it, and not just in a factory sense but even creatively to take advantage of the format and the tape being used. And to make matters worse the 388 manual doesn't present a feedback methodology for setting the bias...it simply directs the operator/tech to set the bias amp output for each track to a fixed voltage. That doesn't take into account different tape brands and formulations and yes it matters. For instance LPR35 requires about 2/3 the bias level than 457. So most people, unless they've read my posts on this, will set the bias amps to 150mVAC regardless of the tape, and if they are using LPR35 that will be a significantly over biased situation which equals what? Diminished HF response..."lo-fi"...cooooooool. This can also be jacked up pretty good when you load some +9 tape or ATR tape on the 388, which a lot of people do thinking they'll get that phat bitchin' tape compression not realizing they are actually setting bar further away from saturating the tape, the 388 amps can't really drive super high output tape to saturation before they start breaking up (but maybe that's part of the "sound"), and you wouldn't want to hit it hard anyway because then you're going to have tracking issues with the dbx...but...maybe that's yet another factor in the "sound". If people want to run their 388 that way more power to them, I think where I take exception is they often don't understand what it means to or how to dial the machine in to factory spec, which then gives you a reference point for deviation and experimentation, but I think a lot of operators don't really know what they are doing, or how far off-track they are from maximizing the 388 toward their sort of intangible subjective goal. And their ears will believe anything, even if what sounds good is, at least in part, the results of overbias, line amps clipping and dbx mis-tracking. And it accentuates the issue that the 388 runs at 7.5ips and so has some pretty decent LF response for such a narrow format...the decent LF response accentuates, for instance, the poor HF response of an overbias situation. I wish I had the opportunity to step into a situation where a 388 is being used and run tone ladders and see where the response is. I bet in a number of cases the curve would be face-ditching at 12-14kHz. But the LF response may also be part of the "sound" people talk about, which, as has been pointed out, may be achievable in 1/2" 8-track format at 7.5ips, but that's maybe a bit of a generalization, because its also about the head coil profile and where the head bump sits in the response curve, so maybe there is actually a "sound" to the 388, but that sound is fidelity limited by the format and how I believe a lot of 388s are being setup...and that's the lo-fi sound. My personal experience? When setup to factory spec and setting the bias appropriately to the tape being used? The 388 does have a nice sound, decent HF response and good LF response, but I'm speaking relative to what you might expect from a machine that has the same track width as 4-track cassette...yes...the 388 is essentially a double 4-track cassette machine running at 7.5ips with a better mixing section than most cassette multitrack machines, but honestly the signal path is very garden variety on the 388 mixing section. It sounds better than 4-track cassette, but that's because its running at 7.5ips as opposed to the typical 3.75ips...its not the mixing section...the 246 is comparable. Its mostly TL072 based. I'm not knocking that, it is just very straight-forward, nothing remarkable happening circuit-wise in the 388. The M-300 series consoles were discussed above...they are actually significantly different from the 388 mixing section...lots of 5532s in the M-300 mixers. I like their sound much better than the 388 mixing section, but for vastly overgrown cassette multitrack the 388 is comparably better than its cassette-based cousins. But yes...you are going to have much more freedom to achieve different results with a standalone mixer and a 1/2" 8-track machine. You want lo-fi on a 388 or a 1/2" 8-track machine? Forget +9 tape or even +6 tape...I'd try calibrating it at 250mWb/m but use a +3 tape...now you'll get some saturation but have a much better chance at letting the dbx do its thing...and I'd mess with the bias, even setting it up differently for different tracks depending on the source.
Anyway...I digress.
So I've owned three of them...the first one was the one that got the full tear-down refurb...and I sold it without a second thought. Why? The 388 is not a robust machine physically. You have to take some care when moving it. You have to take great care when plugging or unplugging module bay cards to avoid breaking/bending card edge connector pins or connector housings themselves...they are prone to solder joint failures. They are prone to a couple logic system failures. I've seen a fair amount with transport logic issues and all the guts are intertwined...its a challenge to suss problems out on them because they are a physical PITA to work on if you've got to do anything beyond basic maintenance stuff...and they DO go bad...but the biggest reason? Replacement record/play heads are unobtanium. All of that put together, my *personal* experience, leaves me scratching my head at what people are paying for these things these days...388s are NOT getting more reliable with age...but I get it...they really are cool looking and they are unique...nothing else exactly like them...so I get it. But they are not a secret sonic treasure trove...they are limited...they sound nice...but you can get "nice" in a lot of ways, and I prefer using equipment that isn't fragile and on its way to extinction eventually. Consider this...there are LOTS of bands...LOTS and LOTS of them with an indie sound, and only a few call out using the 388. Do I sound like I'm being disparaging toward the 388? I'm sorry...I don't intend to...I really like a lot of Tascam stuff from the 1980s, and I do think the 388 is cool, but its because it has a visual allure and is unique...I respect that...and Teac did a nice job with it, but at 30+ years old they are not aging well. I would take an M-308 with a 38 and pair of DX-4Ds all day long over a 388...save my money and have a more reliable setup with a broader range of possibilities.
And if you're wondering why I'm saying all these things and yet have owned three 388s? I got #2 and #3 on the cheap...non-functioning with issues, put some love into them in order to flip them and help pay some bills...and I enjoyed working on them and bringing back their luster...putting some bills in my pocket while offering a happy buyer a good deal.
Last edited: