Warning: I bought a piece of crap

[Grey Angel]

...so don't make the same mistake! I bought a Fostex X-12. Beginner level, ok, it was cheap. But it sucks. I may be a beginner recorder (aside from years of using the generic Sound Recorder that comes with Windows), but I do not have beginner ears, and no matter what I do, how good the tapes are, it sounds horrible. I'm returning it. Now.

Ok, so, you've all been warned. As you were.

 

[invisiblenemies]

I'm returning it. Now.

Music stores are open this late in Arkansas?

Kick ass.

 

[A Reel Person]

You should'a bought a Tascam!

Of tape recorders still available as brand new equipment, the Tascam 414mkII is the top of the line. It will simply blow away the Fostex X-12. Sorry to hear you had such a bad first experience with your new Fostex, but analog's not all like that! Tascam's where it's at!

 

[Grey Angel]

Of tape recorders still available as brand new equipment, the Tascam 414mkII is the top of the line. It will simply blow away the Fostex X-12. Sorry to hear you had such a bad first experience with your new Fostex, but analog's not all like that! Tascam's where it's at!

Well, yeah, I'm still sticking with analog. I just...I dunno, LIKE it. The 414 is a bit out of my price range right now (which is, sadly, however much I get back after returning the dern x-12 after restocking fees). About the "now" thing..I was just emphasizing my resolve. I bought it from musiciansfriend.


Man, I need a job....

 

[easychair]

Man, I need a job....

Lots of coffee shops out there, and the tips are better than you get delivering mail. Or so I've been told.

 

[Grey Angel]

Dang, that 414 looks nice Looks like a much better buy, too, with 6 inputs, and it only costs about twice as much . ...And I can hook my microphone in without running it through an amp which adds noise...


Sweet

 

[Grey Angel]

Lots of coffee shops out there, and the tips are better than you get delivering mail. Or so I've been told.

rofl

 

[invisiblenemies]

Dang, that 414 looks nice

Not to hijack this thread, but I have a 464 for sale.

https://homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=184949

 

[fraserhutch]

Darn, I thought this was another Behringer thread.......

 

[Ford Van]

The best sounding 4 track cassette I ever heard was the Fostex X 26.

What you heard while tracking something is exactly how it sounded playing back. What I hated about ALL Tascam decks I tried was that the playback sounded VERY different than what I monitored while tracking.

Too bad they don't make that any more. I did 1000's of hours on that thing over the 4 years of heavy use I put on it. I think I wore the heads out!

 

[Ford Van]

On the other hand, one of the worst sounding 4 track cassette machines I ever used was the Fostex X 15! Gawd, that thing was JUNK sounding!

I still don't like Tascams. I don't know what they did, but you CERTAINLY don't hear back what you were monitoring while tracking to their stuff! I have tried MANY of their units, all the same thing!

 

[A Reel Person]

The 464's even better,...

but I was trying to limit my post, as it was, to brand new equipment!

As Invis.. says,... the 464's out there used, and it's a high end Tascam Portastudio. If you don't mind used equipment, there's also the 424mkII, 424mkIII, 246, 244, 488mkII, 644 & 688, all of which blow away the X-12.

Cheers!

 

[travelin travis]

I can vouch for the 424mkII. I loved the one I had, for the time that is.

 

[blazingstrings]

F#@k Analog!

Hey Arkansas,
I had friends that use to live in Harison and in Paraguld Ark.
Lucky I bet its like 65 degrees there right now not like the 20 in the midwest.

For $175.00 you could be way happier and making better tracks with a digital ZOOM MRS-4.......... WHy deal with tapes?
Analog is the works of the devil! You dont wanna be pals with the Devil do you?

Plus you can import tracks from the ZOOM and Burn CD's on your PC.
Think about it and "heres your sign" *er* I mean a link: http://www.zoom.co.jp/english/products/mrs4/index.php

Check that thing out! Plus it has effects and editing features. Try that with a analog machine.

Just a thought. But if you have to stick to analog get the 414MKII(I had one) and get a cleaning kit for it. Learn how to use it (Thats important), use it often(every take if possible).

Later
-Blaze

 

[A Reel Person]

Now, now,... no f#&'n c#@@ words please!

This board exists to prove there's a lot more about making good recordings than gear. Better gear will generally give you better recordings, with all other things being equal, but it's not just about the gear. Don't get me wrong, 'cause gear is cool, gear is great & all that. I'm one of the worst examples of a "gear-head", but don't let that fool you. (There's other names for it, but I won't say in mixed company). It's about knowing how best to use the gear, and that only comes from experience. There's a lot to be said in recording about technique,... (but I won't try to say it all in this post!)

I don't wanna say outright that the X-12 sucks,... although I hold that as a possibility. From reading your posts, it's clear you had a bad experience with it. Maybe you had a defective deck or some other problem, but I've not tried the X-12, so I should reserve judgment. I'd say in that price class ($99) the Tascam MF-P01 is probably a better machine, but IMO Tascams are usually better than their similar Fostex counterparts. Anyway, those are both low end machines.

You didn't mention your intended budget, but for $175.00 I'd go to Ebay and get either a Tascam 424mkIII (4-track) or a 488mkII (8-track) cassette Portastudio. If you gave me a different budget, I might give you a different answer.

I think I'd pass on the Zoom MRS-4, and pretty much e'thing in that class of devices, including Zoom 8-trackers. The Zooms have lots of bells and whistles, drum machine, whatnot,... but it's kinda limited in the mixing section, as are it's big brother Zoom 8-trackers. There are a lot of things I don't like about that type of multitracker. Aw, heck, that's probably a whole other post!

E'one likes something different, in the end. E'one has their own idea of what features and capabilities they want in recording equipment, and it's always something different for e'one you ask. It even changes from time to time, or depending on the situation, for any single person, too. Even I like variety.

 

[blazingstrings]

NO DAVE NO!!!!
Dont be slamming Zooms dude! I'll call me fellow Zoomers fer a beat down, Gitter dun an all that snot!

Not to hijack the post but how is the Zoom limited mixing wise?
I own Two, I find them the perfect balance between digital and analog four track.
Have you tryed one? There pretty slick.
I have a MRS-4 and MRS-8 and the MRT-3b drum machine. Simple and easy for a 4-track minded person to get into.

That said I loved my 414MKII and wish I still had it messed up tapeheads and all(used and abused before I bought it)....

To each there own!.....

-Blaze

 

[A Reel Person]

Fair enough. I'd not slam something just for slammin's sake!

To the best of my knowledge, and correct me if I'm wrong,...

The devices such as the Zoom MRS-4 and MRS-8 have two inputs and record two tracks at a time (max),... with no inputs numbering above "2" (the magic number), whilst,... (heh,... whilst,... like guys from the UK say,...) AHEM,... whilst those 2-inputs have no facility to be mixed with each other down to one track. It's just "inputs-to-tracks" architecture, with no "front-end" mixing of inputs capable without an external mixer.

The typical configuration choices are either:...
Input A routed to one track,...
Input A routed to two tracks,...
Input B routed to one track,...
Input B routed to two tracks,...
Input A & B routed to two individual tracks simultaneously.
(There is no facility to MIX inputs A & B together and route them to ONE track).
AHEM,... THIS IS NOT MIXING, IT'S INPUT-TO-TRACK ARCHITECTURE.

Now,... once your 4- or 8-tracks are recorded to HD, and it's time for mixdown, THEN is when the built-in "mixer" comes into play. For lack of a better term, I call that "output-side-only" mix capability.

On the other hand, something along the lines of a Tascam 424mkIII, 424mkII, 414mkII (and a host of other "classic" Tascam Portastudios) have a full function mixer that may be used to mix signals on the "input-side" as well as the traditional "output-side" mixing, (the mixing of tracks' output of course is taken for granted).

I think that "inputs-to-tracks" architecture you find on the majority of units these days is less preferrable to a "full functioned mixer" on the front end (input-side) of the recording, and that's a highly important feature to look at, in my book. Not only that, but being limited to recording 2-tracks simultaneously/max is a staggering deficiency that's typically found on the lowest-low-end analog recorders,... yet it seems to be a "standard" on most of the typical digital 8-trackers out there. It's late and I don't wanna name names, but anyone with any knowledge about recording equipment knows what I'm talking about. At least your mid and high end analog Tascam Portastudios will record up to 4-tracks simultaneously, and I find that to be an important feature worth looking at and seeking out.

Y'know, to each their own,... but I'd rather have the more highly capable mixer on the front end, (input-side),... never mind the "standard" mixer you'd expect to mix your tracks once they're recorded,... (that comes on all units across the board),... and to have a recorder that's capable of recording 4-tracks simultaneously is surely better than 2.

See, when "traditional" high end analog 4- and 8-trackers would record 4- and 8-tracks simultaneously, (respectively), with full functioned mixers capable of mixing anywhere from 4-to-20 inputs on the "input-side" of the recording process since the 80's, why would I want to step down to a 4- or 8-tracker that only has 2-inputs with no "input-side" mixing capability, and records only 2-tracks simultaneously/max, in this post-2k reality? That's rhetorical, of course, because I wouldn't.

That's my full analysis and my best recommendation at this time. Beyond that, I don't care much what people buy for themselves. Y'know, having been at this so-called "home recording" game for well over 20 years has probably made me more discriminating when it comes to gear. Beyond that, e'one has their own little list of features and capabilities that they consider important in recording equipment, and that's an individual judgment for each person to make.

Now, having endured that explanation, I hope you don't think I'm just bashing Zoom. Heck,... a variety of Fostexes, Rolands and Korgs fit that description too, and I find them all inadequate in some way. That's not bashing, that's a technical opinion based on tangible things, and that's why I recommend what I recommend. You can take or leave my posts, for all I care.

HINT: I'm already stacked to the rafters with all the high end Portastudios, reels and mixers I need, and until technology takes a turn for the better, my recommendations remain the same,... for technical reasons. I have better things to do than bash some underpowered little piece of recording gear only for the sake of getting my jollies. I'm just trying to help steer clueless newbies (ahem,... no offense!) ... in the direction of the more highly capable machines.

I hope that's clear enough.

Sorry for my run-on sentences, but I get that way late at night!

Thanx again!

 

[blazingstrings]

No offense intended or taken.

Hey Dave!

First I gotta sorry for Bashing analog, as that I realize that you are the king-o-analog round these parts.
No offense intended.

I came from using the 414MKII, 424MKII, 424MKIII and a Fostex I think it was a X-twentysomthingerother.... Cant remember is was so long ago.

I wasnt thinking about how many inputs the Zooms have....
Which bings up an important question, how many In's does Grey Angel need?

Now sorry to say your wrong Dave ..........
The Zooms do alow pretty good routing. and actualy if you dont tell the Zoom to rout to separate tracks both in's will go to one track.
If you turn on both ins and arm one track both ins go to it.
If you turn on both ins and arm two tracks it splits the in's to separate tracks.
And there is deep routing bellow the surface. Plus you can use an insert effect when tracking and use a send return effect after(internal effects only though but thats whats nice about being able to export to a PC for deeper edits).
Oh and you can record dry tracks but use the effects when tracking and then add and insert or send/return later.
And you can use the Inputs at mixdown, which is what assume your refering to when you say "output-side-only mix capability".
Granted you can realy add a processor to an individual track(you can use the internal ones though), but you do get a Stereo Mastering effect, the insert(stereo or mono) and the Send/return effects available at mixdown and there is a stereo master track on Zooms as well.

The Zooms have nice routing functions, the only thing I miss is having dedicated Pan knobs for each track.

and hey I loved my four tracks four there warmth but I dont miss-Tha-hiss.
I like the clarity. But thats not a bash at analog!

FOr me I dont find them limiting in anyway, I felt a bit limited on my four track but all I had back then was a 424MKII, Guitar, Zoom 505 original, Boss DR.110 drum machine, casio tone keyboard, harmony bass and a Cheep mic.
I did have fun though, HMMMM.........

I think the reason they make most digitals machines with only two ins is that most guys (I say most, not all) are only doing one or two tracks at a time.
Granted I would love 8-in's. But I get by since everything I own only puts out two chanels(electric drums ect).

And I'm not trying to sell you on the Idea of digital recorders as I can see your set for machines. Just wanted to give Grey Angel more options for the money thats all.

I agree with you on the fact that e'one has there list of important features.
For me its simplicity and portability, you need better mixing and more in's ect.
For me I hate having to clean the machines all the time and dealing with tape and tape stretch. But You probably love doing that stuff.

NO! I dont think your bashing ZOOM, your just showing the other side of the coin which is a good thing. Same for me.
I was just playing around with the "NO DAVE NO!!!!
Dont be slamming Zooms dude! I'll call me fellow Zoomers fer a beat down, Gitter dun an all that snot!" Thing! and the F#@k analoh line.

I'm with ya man! This is a great discussion! I wish more posts were like this insted of all the name calling.
I would have more fun here.

Later

-Blaze

 

[A Reel Person]

Zoom, Zoom, ZOOM!

Hey Dave! .... I realize that you are the king-o-analog round these parts.

Ah, heck, nawww,... but thanx just the same!

No offense intended.

Of course not! None taken!

I came from using the 414MKII, 424MKII, 424MKIII and a Fostex...

Yeah, I figured you're alright, and you're not just talking out yer a--....!

Which bings up an important question, how many In's does Grey Angel need?

It wasn't made clear, but keep in mind she started with the X-12, that's a 1-input-wonder like the Tascam MFP01! Y'kinda start at the very bottom with those machines, and the only way to go is UP!!

Now sorry to say your wrong Dave ..........

Aww, c'mon,... you take great pleasure in it!! Anyway, it wouldn't be the first time, and it probably won't be the last!

The Zooms do alow pretty good routing. and actualy if you dont tell the Zoom to rout to separate tracks both in's will go to one track.

That's something I didn't know!!!

If you turn on both ins and arm one track both ins go to it.
If you turn on both ins and arm two tracks it splits the in's to separate tracks.
And there is deep routing bellow the surface. Plus you can use an insert effect when tracking and use a send return effect after(internal effects only though but thats whats nice about being able to export to a PC for deeper edits).
Oh and you can record dry tracks but use the effects when tracking and then add and insert or send/return later.

THANK YOU for that detailed explanation! The ZOOM seems to have capability WELL ABOVE the typical pack of Fostexes, etc.!! I'm encouraged when I hear that!!

And you can use the Inputs at mixdown, which is what assume your refering to when you say "output-side-only mix capability".

No,... I'd consider "mixing the disc tracks down to stereo internally" an "output-side-only" mixer. What you're discribing I think would rather be called a "Dual-Function" mixer. I borrowed that term from a standard feature on the Tascam 644/688 & 564 Portastudios. (I didn't just make it up!)

Granted you can realy add a processor to an individual track(you can use the internal ones though), but you do get a Stereo Mastering effect, the insert(stereo or mono) and the Send/return effects available at mixdown and there is a stereo master track on Zooms as well.

Ok, question: Are you talking about a "switchable function" or are you talking about actual In/Out (efx loop) patch points???

The Zooms have nice routing functions, the only thing I miss is having dedicated Pan knobs for each track.

That's understandable!

and hey I loved my four tracks four there warmth but I dont miss-Tha-hiss.
I like the clarity. But thats not a bash at analog!

Fair enough, and it's a common concern, but I've somehow been able to minimize tape-hiss to a point that it's not a concern. As with all things like this, YMMV!

FOr me I dont find them limiting in anyway, I felt a bit limited on my four track but all I had back then was a 424MKII, Guitar, Zoom 505 original, Boss DR.110 drum machine, casio tone keyboard, harmony bass and a Cheep mic.
I did have fun though, HMMMM.........

Yeah.

I think the reason they make most digitals machines with only two ins is that most guys (I say most, not all) are only doing one or two tracks at a time.
Granted I would love 8-in's. But I get by since everything I own only puts out two chanels(electric drums ect).

I agree. That's why the 2-input models are so popular in the market today. 2-inputs works for me most of the time, too, but it kinda hampers me when I consider if/when I'd want to record an entire live band. Fortunately, that's not very often at all.

And I'm not trying to sell you on the Idea of digital recorders as I can see your set for machines. Just wanted to give Grey Angel more options for the money thats all.

I fully understand. Hey,... the dirty little secret is that "Reel Person" has a fair number of digital units, too! Shhhh! Don't tell anyone!

I agree with you on the fact that e'one has there list of important features.
For me its simplicity and portability, you need better mixing and more in's ect.

Yes and no! I like simplicity and portability just the same,... and I don't always need more mixing inputs,... but it's nice to have the option with something that's handily built-in, and not something I have to lug another mixer around for!! I think we agree on this point, too,... despite appearances!

For me I hate having to clean the machines all the time and dealing with tape and tape stretch. But You probably love doing that stuff.

Well,... I wouldn't say "love",... but as a parent you love your children, and yet you have to wipe their butts at least for the first few years. Y'get use to that, but y'never really "love" it! Then when one child passes through that stage, often times another little one comes along to take his place!! I kinda look at my Portastudios and other recording gear as my "children",... heh. Hey,... I at least consider them as my "extended family"!! (I know,... that's twisted!!)

NO! I dont think your bashing ZOOM, your just showing the other side of the coin which is a good thing. Same for me.

Yeah, there's a lot of gear out there, that's for sure!! I scope out all of it, though I only buy a small percentage of what's out there.

I was just playing around with the "NO DAVE NO!!!!
Dont be slamming Zooms dude! I'll call me fellow Zoomers fer a beat down, Gitter dun an all that snot!" Thing! and the F#@k analoh line.

Of course!

I'm with ya man! This is a great discussion! I wish more posts were like this insted of all the name calling.
I would have more fun here.

Awww, f#@& you!! Heh, heh,... JUST KIDDING!!! Yeah, this post proves we're thinking mostly along the same lines!

Later

-Blaze

THANX for the informative reply! I've now had ZOOMs bumped up a bit above the pack of Fostexes, Korgs, etc., in the little recording heirarchy in my mind!! Of course there are a lot of other highly capable Fostexes, Korgs, etc., that this discussion doesn't cover, nor is it intended to. Typically, the more money you spend, the more you'll get in features, and I think that's well understood.

I'VE SIMPLY BEEN WRONG ABOUT ZOOMS, BUT AT THIS POINT HAVE BEEN CORRECTED!

THANX AGAIN!!!

YOU-DA-MAN!!

 

[blazingstrings]

Check out the Zoom Site for the MRS-8 the routing is realy smart: http://www.zoom.co.jp/english/products/mrs8/

If you have a chance look at the manual:
http://www.zoom.co.jp/english/download/manual/english.php
Page 58 of the manual shows the basic input routing.
Its cool!

Yeah I love the Zooms so much I started a Yahoo group for the MRS-8 users:
http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/zoommrs8/

The thing that realy sells me on the MRS series ZOOM is that if you have one, You can work any one of them (mostly).

I know what you mean about routing and most of the current and some past machines.
I had a Roland VS-880EX and a VS-890, great routing but imposible for a simple novice like me to figure out and start tracking easly.
I had a Yamaha AW16G, I hated routing and stuff on that. Pain in the butt!

"Ok, question: Are you talking about a "switchable function" or are you talking about actual In/Out (efx loop) patch points???"

Ummm, let me see if I'm reading ya here.
WHat I mean and I miss stepped I meant to say cant not can.
But what I meant is you cant add say an external delay effect from another processor. There is no FX I/O realy. I mean you could use the main outs and send them to an effect and return to the in's.
Also I was saying that there is basicly three available effects internaly on the mrs-8. A Insert effect assignable to a single chanel, a Send/return effect that can be mixed on every chanel, and a Mastering section for running the final mix through.

Is that what you were asking?

Well gotta go I will chat at ya later more.

-Blaze