Weird scenes inside the goldmine! TASCAM 388 > DAW

[gentlejohn]

Anybody who's been following my (slow!) progress this end will be aware that I recently attempted my first recording mixdown using a Tascam 388 but with very limited success! Nope, it didn't go so well as my machine definitely appears to have some kind of fault with its Record button (when ever I depress it I get an annoying 'click' - every touch results in a glitch that comes out on the tape (and shows up as a very visible spike when viewing as a waveform!))

Thing is, I have my first composition on this machine 'trapped' in it. As it currently stands, it's too riddled with mistakes where I was experimenting & trying to work out what was going on BUT between these glitches & mistakes there's a song in there! After numerous attempts I threw the towel in and just accepted that I didn't have the skill (nor enough hands!) to physically mix this particular song 'within the box' as it were.

So ... today, taking a leaf out of Miroslav's book, I borrowed an 8 input Lexicon I/O interface (a Model 1082 I think) & used it to hook the Tascam up to my Mac. I'm on a coffee break right now but I've just attempted a transfer of the 8 tracks from the Tascam into my Mac running Logic 9. It seemed to go OK (need to go back and check it) I used the PGM Buss Outs and just tried to match levels coming into the DAW.

Thing is, I had a funky thing going on with delay using my newly acquired Space Echo in the Effects Loop when trying to mix this originally within the box but, sending 8 tracks out via the PGM Buss Outs, my individual song component tracks are being sent 'DRY' to the DAW. Hmm ... is there any way around this? It would have been cool to send pre-effected tracks out but, having tried (ie: RCA Tape Outs; 1/4" 'Send' Outs; RCA PGM Buss Outs) I can't seem to think of a way to succesfully do this!

To be honest, the only reason I'm trying this idea with the DAW is because I want to use the editing capabilities to edit out these glitches on my individual tracks. I did try recording over them but, like I say, every time I just touch the Record button on the Tascam I'm getting these 'clicks' so trying to delete them by touching the Record button is actually creating more glitches which completely defeats the object of the exercise! (Can I just point out at this point, I'm not some OCD perfectionist - I don't mind a bit of hiss or noise at all it's just that these clicks I'm getting when touching the record button are nasty! Not remotely musical or organic just sore on the ears!)

My original plan was just to get the tracks out of the 388 (individually), edit out the clicks (a massive big faff to be honest!) then bring them back into the Tascam (again, individually) to carry on back at where I was at ie: adding Space Echo and Reverb via the Effects Loop then mixing the song. Unfortunately it seems, although you can get EIGHT tracks out from the Tascam fairly easily enough, using one of these Lexicon interfaces, you can't get EIGHT tracks back in. You can only return in STEREO it seems. I didn't realise this 'til I hooked everything up - BUMMER!

Could anybody be so kind to suggest how best to play this? Work-arounds? Creative suggestions in this situ? Anything really! I'm a bit stuck I guess and my brains feeling like putty right now. THANKS IN ADVANCE!

 

[miroslav]

I'm sure the other 388 owners will chime in about their punch in/out experiences ....but if you are getting THAT much "click" when engaging REC.....something is wrong with the machine.

Either it has some issue or it wasn't set up right (Erase current is off, or Bias setting is off, or both)....or a combination of both an electronic issue and the setup.
Not sure who did the work for you, but you might want to discuss the problem with them.

 

[miroslav]

Don't think there is a Lexicon Model 1082....? What is the correct model?
If it only has 2 channel analog output....then yeah, you're stuck with going just to stereo back to the tape.

Look....I think you need to take a deep breath and come to grips with some realities.
Sure, it would be great if this can connect to that, and then run it over here, and back over there, and it all works as you imagined it.....BUT....at some point you come face-to-face with the equipment's capability limitations and your "plan".

At that point...you need to make-do, and adjust the plan or change the equipment.

In your present situation...without spending more money or anything....I would simply track to the 388 and then dump to DAW for edits and mixing. Forget going back to the 388, unless you want to simply dump your final stereo mix to tape just to have it back in analog.

AFA the Space Echo...use it during tracking but make sure you really want that effect as part of the track, because you won't be able to remove/adjust it later in the mix.
I would not use the Space Echo on a stereo mix....that's not going to work or sound right, as you will not be able to control individual levels of reverb for a given instrument, and having all the elements with the same amount of echo/reverb will sound like ass.
To try and use the Space Echo with the DAW.......mmmmmm, all depends on how it hooks up and what latency there is, etc. It may not be worth the effort, IMO...and simply may not work well with the DAW as an external FX box.
Once the tracks are in the DAW, you could(?) run them individually to the Space Echo, and record the echo/reverb to a new track in the DAW...but again, all depends on the I/O and latency and then you might have to "slide" the reverb track to get the right sync/feel....and you may not get what you want.
With all that work...I would just use an echo/reverb plug-in for any DAW tracks.

 

[A Reel Person]

If...

If the digital I/O interface will give you 8 individual outputs...

You can record 8 inputs simultaneously onto 8 tracks on the 388.

Use each input, 1-8, and assign each input to an individual PGM BUSS, 1-8.
Rec-Enable each track, 1-8, and press Record/Play to begin recording.

 

[lonewhitefly]

In addition to Miroslav's sound advice, I'd like to add a few things:

Maybe ask yourself a couple questions:

What's more important to you? Getting the music recorded, or the music being analog?

Would you rather be able to do a lot of punch-ins, or record analog?

Personally, I would accept that punching-in parts is not feasible on your recorder, and move on. You could probably get away with a few punches here and there, but you'd have to ride the faders.

Some folks may think I'm backwards, but I'm only interested in recording on tape, so the recordings being made analog is a prerequisite. I don't mind digital elements or final digital formats, but I need my workflow to be analog.

Getting an all-analog set-up going is not easy. Integrating analog with digital is easier for some, and more difficult for others.

'Limitations' in analog are not the same across the board for everyone. Different decks have different quirks. Availability of techs, availability of recorders, your own technical knowledge, your own workflow preferences, your musicianship, the people you know, and your budget all factor in to the limitations for your project; these all contribute to what yours are.

On my Ampex 8-track, the sync response is so lousy that bounces cannot be made for specific parts easily. I have to bounce EVERYTHING or nothing. So this means, I record 7 tracks, bounce them all, then record 7 more. Or I could bounce a stereo track and do 6 more, or bounce however many individual tracks I want (guitar with strings, bass with glockenspiel, etc), but the key here is I have to do them all at once. This is a striking contrast to the way I learned to work on the 80-8, where I could bounce whatever tracks I wanted, leaving everything else alone in full fidelity (which is also the case on your 388).

Here is what I would do in your situation:

GREAT NEWS: you only used 7 of your 8 tracks. I would consider this to be cosmic insight. I would bounce 2 or more tracks to the open track, comping parts while riding faders to get rid of the clicks ... add your echo too (just take the buss out from either L or R main out). Then repeat however many tracks need it, leaving the ones that don't need it (or the ones you can handle) for the final mix. You'll end up with different reverbs that are tailored to the bounces (and can be spread throughout the stereo field).

You can even use this as an opportunity to add some extra ear candy to the track if it's needed.

THEN going forward accept this as part of the limitations of your deck, and part of your workflow. So your choices are now to do the bounces as described above on every recording, or limit your punches to the ones you can handle with the faders during mix.

 

[A Reel Person]

Gonna reach back into my memory banks here...

It's been a very long time since I did any sessions on the 388, but I don't remember having any problems or audible anomalies with punching in. Even if there was a very minor click, or a continuity problem in certain cases, it always seemed in context of the full mix it was negligible.

However, I did hone my craft first on a 244 and then a 38/M30 combo, so I did have the essence of what it takes to make nearly seamless punches and the context of what does or doesn't work in punching.

After so long, I deemed it was practical to punch into the little pauses and gaps of the audio track, and not try to punch out unless there was another accommodating gap, otherwise continue recording the track from the punch in point, forward to the end of the track. What you'll be able to achieve via punching varies greatly on the overall sonics and structure of the material being recorded.

In analog, a punch out will leave a blank gap that represents the physical space between the record and erase heads. This has to be taken into account and compensated for in methodology.

 

[miroslav]

Maybe ask yourself a couple questions:

What's more important to you? Getting the music recorded, or the music being analog?

Would you rather be able to do a lot of punch-ins, or record analog?

Yup.....that's what I was getting at.

gentlejohn,
At some point you need to focus on your priorities, and the stuff that's out of reach for the setup you have, just go around it, rather than beat yourself up about why it won't work, or jump through a lot of hoops just to make it work.
IOW....is recording music the priority or the type of reverb, or analog VS digital or some involved punch in/out process because you're trying to get way more out of your limited track count than you can realistically while keeping the audio quality you desire.

I love analog, but I wouldn't beat myself up just to stay all-analog if my production goal was going to suffer for it.
Few people will really know or care how you recorded something....they only hear the end result.
So use the setup that benefits your goal, rather than adjust your goal for the benefit of the gear...of course, there's some give-n-take...so record to tape, but at the same time, adjust your production based on the limited track count.....and so on.

Getting an all-analog set-up going is not easy. Integrating analog with digital is easier for some, and more difficult for others.

Yeah....I see some people here who get a little obsessed about saying/keeping things "all-analog"....but then their gear and workflow becomes a burden rather than a benefit, and the audio quality seems to take second place to the "all-analog" goal. Going all-analog isn't about simply using "all-analog" gear....it's also a mindset, workflow, and production consideration....which I know you understand, but I think some just think it's about "all-analog" gear.

I spent a lot of time, effort and money to give myself the options of all-analog OTB, ITB or any hybrid combination in either direction, and I can easily switch from one to the other...from project to project.
That said, for the way I like to work, the hybrid approach has become my favorite. Track to tape, dump to and edit in DAW, then mix down OTB, playing back from the DAW to my 2-track deck, and from there it goes right back to the DAW to capture the final stereo mix in digital so I can apply some "mastering" and also create the various digital formats for upload/distro.
That allows me to get a little more involved with productions, and that's what I often enjoy.....but I can switch to a more basic, all-analog production, if the project called for it.
No matter what way I choose....the production process has to adjust somewhat. I can't approach tracking the exact same way for all-analog.....as when planning to dump to the DAW for edits, comps and digital processing. Same if I was going to work ITB, I would make adjsutments to my process.

And that's the point in what we are saying to you, gentlejohn....focus on the priorities, and then use what you have to get there. The things that are out of reach...don't let them become your focus.

 

[gentlejohn]

Hey! Thanks for all your time, effort & insights folks. I want to take this opportunity to apologise! I dunno, I bet you all think I'm some kind of anally retentive, OCD-stricken, perfectionist who doesn't have a scooby what he's talking about eh?!!

Well, I can assure you that I'm not. I'm just a regular guy having an unfortunate series of on-going problems with a recording console I happened to blow my entire available budget on (this 'record click' thing being just the latest issue in a long line of problems I have been experiencing since acquiring this unit last December).

Like I've mentioned now on a number of ocassions, I'm definitely more musical than I am technical so that hasn't helped matters but ... the whole reason I opted for recording with a Tascam 388 is because I actually used to own one many moons ago and I REALLY liked composing with it. Thing is, my original 388 machine I bought new in the early '90s! It had NONE of the ongoing problems I have been experiencing with this current one. Yes, I realise that's probably due to the fact that it was 30 odd years ago and, in general, stuff tends to function better when newer (with the exception of the Martin acoustic I had to sell to buy this current 388 - that guitar just sounded better & better as the years went by, tone woods eh!)

As I've also mentioned, the main reason I made the much considered, retrograde decision to acquire another 388 model was because, having spent the last 7-8 years producing music with a computer I just got bored & bogged down with the whole technology side of things and I really missed the EASE & SIMPLICITY of making music with that old analogue wardrobe of a machine I once owned (plus I much prefered the sound of the recordings I made with my old 388 over practically everything I produced making music with a computer to be honest!)

The only reason I recently attempted to move the tracks out to a DAW (using a Lexicon 'IO/82' interface - not '1082' as stated!) was as an experiment really - it's not something I wish to do regularly as, like I say, I'm trying to downsize here and keep things simple! That said, having had difficulty doing it manually on the Tascam 'within the box', I knew I could fairly easily edit out these clicks digitally but, at the time, I wasn't aware that this interface (which I had no prior experience of using - I just borrowed it for an afternoon) didn't give me the option of transfering the eight tracks back in. So yeah, like I say, just a bit of an experiment that got too involved but sometimes you've got to try this stuff if only to come to the conclusion: "Well, I won't be doing that again in any great hurry - life's too short!"

Anyway, I've been in touch with the tech who did the full service on my machine a few months back. I've sent him audio examples of what's occuring every time a I engage the Record key ("Clunk, CLICK!") and it appears I'm going to have to rip my studio apart (again!) to get it back to him so he can try to figure out what's happening and this time get to the bottom of it! I'm really hoping it won't be laid up in the workshop for as long as it was last time as I'm really desperate to just get going again with the pure & simple art of music making.

In the meantime I'll just keep sticking ideas down on my dictaphone. Over the months I've acquired quite a few in this format! It will be really great to (one day soon I hope!) get to fully realise them .....

 

[jpmorris]

Good luck with it! While punching in can introduce a gap, actual clicks are not normal on TASCAM gear and getting it fixed is the way to go. I remember someone having this issue with an MS-16 and I have a vague feeling it turned out to be some kind of relay-related issue. That may not necessarily be the case with yours, of course.

Either way, I'd be interested to hear the original mix of the song, clicks and all...

 

[gentlejohn]

Either way, I'd be interested to hear the original mix of the song, clicks and all...

Thanks JP! Erm ... yeah, OK, what the hell! I don't normally put stuff out that I'm not happy with but an audio example of what I've been trying to explain here would perhaps paint a 1000 words (and ANY feedback would be much appreciated and a great help no doubt!) Right, I'll get on it and, before I have to send the machine away again , 'throw' together (quite literally!) a couple of mixes namely:

A. An 'all in' ANALOGUE mix - Complete with clicks (plus Delay & Reverb courtesy of Tascam FX Loops)
B. A DAW mix of the original raw tracks with all the clicks digitally edited out (but note: with NO effects or processing added ie: just a completely 'DRY', in the room sound)

Thanks for your interest. Leave it with me. CHEERS!!

 

[miroslav]

I'm definitely more musical than I am technical.....

That's what we're trying to help you with....to focus on the music part and eliminate the technical BS and hoops as much as you can by keeping it straightforward....which is really what you wanted to do anyway.

The 388 issues aside, which hopefully will get resolved by the tech....I'm sure you'll find your production groove again.
It's always a bit of a learning curve when you change up your rig and switch gears....even if you've done it before in the past. You just need to find a process that works for you.......you'll be making music again.

 

[gentlejohn]

Cheers Miro, that's really kind of you! Thanks for all your help and advice - it's really appreciated Yes, you're absolutely right - it certainly is a learning curve alright! Apart from this little ditty I've been tinkering away with of late (between the clicks!), I realised that I haven't actually done anything of worth using a 388 model for about 15 years now and, as such, I'm really rusty!!! I had been 'working' with Logic for about eight years up until the end of last year when, like I say, it was reminding me too much of 'work' hence the decision to go back to my analogue roots as it were. If I can just get this machine firing on an extra cylinder (or two!) & behaving itself then I'd be a very happy bunny because then I could just crack on with the music making. When I used to own one of these in my distant past, I can remember how its operation whilst tracking became almost invisible to me. That's a great place to be creatively as it allows you to concentrate fully on the job in hand (ie: 'The Muzak'!) and not to 'keep focus'! (As you can probably tell from my tales of woe here, I've been losing focus with this particular unit so far & finding it surprisingly difficult just to get going!) OK, the glass is half full again - CHEERS! PS: This is a GREAT forum!!!

 

[miroslav]

Just so you know it's not only you.....

Last night I'm finally ready to start tracking a new song on my 2", for the first time in awhile, as I've been working in my DAW on a couple of other songs, getting them ready for mixdown, so the tape deck hasn't been used in a couple of months or more.
So I needed to start a new reel of tape, and of course I was going to drop a minute of 1kHz tone across the tracks, and then stripe track 24 with SMPTE so I can lock to the DAW as needed. My usual first step with a reel of tape.
I then send 1kHz at +4dBm to the test signal input on the deck, which lets me hit all 24 tracks at once....but....the VU meters are only registering -6dB VUinstead of 0dB VU...????
Put the same tone individually to a channel input, and I get 0dB VU, which is correct, but WTF..I should get the same when going to the test inpout...????

Try this...try that.....yada, yada, yada....three hours later I finally figure out what the problem is.
So in the past when doing this with a reel of tape, I use to use my Loftech signal generator, which is an old unit, a bit unsteady at times (the tone and/or level "dances" at times), but nothing serious, and it let me do what I needed to do.
Well, I had picked up an NTI Minirator awhile ago, which is great unit for audio work, but while I used it for other things, I had never used it at the test input on the tape deck.
Turned out the Minirator didn't like the unbalanced test input, whereas the old Loftech wasn't as picky....so what was happening, the Ring/Pin 3 signal from the balanced Minirator was getting shorted to the sleeve/Pin 1 signal at the unbalanced TS jack of the test signal input on the deck...and that gave me the -6dB drop in level. DUH!!!!
As soon as I figured it out, I simply made a correctly wired XLR to TS cable (Pin 2 to Tip, Pin 3 to sleeve, Pin 1 floating)...and there was my 0dB VU reading!!!
Not having used the tape deck in awhike to drop tones via the test signal input....I completely forgot it was unbalanced TS...so I chased ghosts for 3 hours until I finally realized what was going on.

Point being....everyone gets their head turned around at times when it comes to audio gear hookups and/or when trying to find a solution to some unexpected hurdle. It can be frustrating....I was so pissed for the 3 hours of time I "wasted"...but once the problem is solved, you kinda laugh at the silliness, and you tuck it away in the back of your head, as it's still something learned, and not totally "wasted" time.

 

[gentlejohn]

Oh Man! That's 3 hours you'll never get back then but "Hey!", a postive learning experience nonetheless as you just 'know' now (and from here on in!) Yep, you won't have to fathom that one out again it's stored in your analogue knowledge bank therefore another 'PROBLEM = SOLUTION' - CONGRATS! Anyway, technical gubbins aside, did you get to start tracking your new song or are you saving that for a future, hopefully gremlins-free, session??

 

[gentlejohn]

"AARRGGH!" This is a ROOM 101 for me ...

Either way, I'd be interested to hear the original mix of the song, clicks and all...

OK, you asked for it! Bit scary this to be honest 'cause, as a rule, I NEVER put out stuff I'm not happy with (and, as it stands, I'm REALLY not happy with this!) Oh well, here goes ... one man's rubbish is another man's gold perhaps! ENJOY??!

NB: TRACK ONE: Warts'n'all Tascam 388 mix (with clicks) TRACK TWO: 'Cleaned up' DAW mix (but completely 'DRY' with no processing or effects!)

CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM CLEARLY WELCOMED!

https://soundcloud.com/gillian-cowcher/3-degrees-demo-w-clicks

 

[j.harv]

OK, you asked for it! Bit scary this to be honest 'cause, like I say, I pretty much NEVER put out stuff that I'm not happy with (and I'm REALLY not happy with this as it stands!) Oh well, here goes ... ENJOY??!

NB: TRACK ONE: Warts'n'all Tascam 388 mix (with clicks) TRACK TWO: 'Cleaned up' DAW mix (but completely 'DRY' with no processing or effects!)

CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM CLEARLY WELCOMED!

https://soundcloud.com/gillian-cowcher/3-degrees-demo-w-clicks

Love it!!!!

Great song.Really catchy.
Well......I kinda had to listen hard for the clicks and Im wearing ear buds. They're there alright,but not as noticeable as I was expecting.
I could see how this would bother you though. Other than that you're getting a nice sound from the 388. And this is a rough mix, so it will sound better once you get to polish it up in the end. I really like the sound of the acoustic guitar...really warm. And that cowbell!!!!! Smashing with the delay on it. Thats gotta stay....
Once you get the 388 up and running again, Im sure your gonna excel with it once you get your work flow going. Sounds Great.!!!

 

[gentlejohn]

Thanks very much Harv - I really appreciate your thoughts & you taking the time to appraise this!

In case you're curious, here's some background on this one ...

I had to (post-auction!) sell a STACK of gear to be able to afford the 388. They're mega-expensive over here on the UK second-hand market - I had my absolute 'very-top-of-my-budget' figure in mind which, of course, in the heat of the bidding moment, I went over but I got rather carried away!!! I exceeded my MAX by £400 = "OUCH!" Way too impulsive! I just hadn't planned on that happening and, in total, ended up paying the best part of a £ Grand for one (which would convert to around $1,700 in your neck of the woods!) On top of this, post-purchase, I paid £75 for an MRL test tape plus £200 to have it serviced!

As a result, I'm still recovering (and still really missing a lot of gear I had to let go!) I guess one of my biggest regrets was having to part with my old Martin acoustic HOWEVER the acoustic you hear on this recording is a new-to-me, far cheaper cedar top Takamine replacement that's actually surprisingly good all things considered and, as a result, I don't miss my ol' Martin nearly half as much I thought I would!

As you've read in my previous post, I did also acquire a Roland Space Echo recently and that's what's providing the OTT slapback delay you've picked up on re: the cowbell (along with less 'out there', judicious amounts glueing other stuff in the mix too). Again, I couldn't afford this Roland either but I'd ALWAYS wanted one and, when one came along at an honest price, I went for it (it's now 'goodbye WEM Copicat' though! ONe in/one out - I can't afford TWO tape echo units!)

Amongst other stuff I've had to let go was pretty much an entire mic collection! I got a bit carried away I have to admit because I ended up selling ... well, practically everything on that front to the extent that this ENTIRE song (ie: every component part bar the kick drum) was recorded with just ONE mic namely a lowly Shure SM57. (The kick's an AKG D12 - I sensibly decided not to let that one go!) Yes, everything else on here is mic'd with an SM57 > Tascam 388. Prior to my major studio upheaval this end (ie: from digital back to analogue) I did happen to get a lot of mileage from a Rode NTK tube condenser (great mic!) but, again, another thing I let go a while back. The NTK is a sort of budget Neumann clone but I found it just wasn't cutting it for me in tandem with the 388.

I'll probably keep a hold of the SM57 'cause it's ALWAYS handy to have one on board but it was never really my intention to use one for well, everything as I have here! I'll just use it as a stepping stone 'til I find the mic that really works for me. (I'm thinking of sticking with a dynamic but higher end maybe? I'm currently researching both the Shure SM7B and EV RE20 but could ideally do with A/B'ing both.) As you can tell, this year so far I've had a massive turn around gear-wise as a result of rethinking the way I record. Apart from a mic or two this has now come to an end. I feel I now have everything I need to be able to do what I need to do. Yeah, I've had some major headaches with this particular Tascam unit (and I'm not out of the woods yet!) but I'm beginning to see the light. Having lost my Martin in 'the line of duty' I'm actually pretty made up with this poor relation Takamine I've scored! (I never really saw myself as a Tak guy but "Hey!" at the end of the day it's just six strings strapped to a bit of tree!) PLUS this Space Echo (a c.1973 (I think!) RE-201 model) is the bee's knees Man! I'm stoked at finally managing to track one down - it's AWESOME!

Anyway, as per usual, I completely digress! [NOTE TO SELF: "Make these posts shorter!"] Getting back to this demo - it's quite literally just a sketch! For all my deliberating on here of late the thing actually only took 15 minutes to record IN ITS ENTIRETY and a mere 10 minutes to 'mix' (and I use that word very loosely where this one's concerned!) I'll definitely end up recording this one again and attempting a definitive version when I (hopefully!) get my 388 up and firing on all four cylinders. I'll also have to make a decision on what will be my main, go-to 'Swiss Army Knife' studio mic - the EV RE20 is currently top of the pops where online reviews stand at least!

But, most of all and MOST IMPORTANTLY: Gear aside, I really need to get my performance, playing AND engineering/production chops back up to speed!! I've been out of the picture for WAY too long and, as a result, I'm mega-rusty on all fronts. You really need to keep yer hand in in this game! Anyway, CHEERS!

 

[miroslav]

Good song, I like the vibe.
Couple of spots where I think the whole punching in/out thing messed a bit with your timing, otherwise not terribly off.
Yup...ther clicks are annoying.
The dry DAW version is fine...why not add some reverb/delay in the DAW, and give it the same flavor as you did on the 388, and you can also tweak the timing too.

Really...I know you're DAW-tired and want to get away from it, but consider this....
With a limited analog/tape rig....plus the DAW....you can keep things very old-school, analog sounding, and then use the DAW to simply polish up glitches, timing, and spot-processing, etc.
That way you still get your analog/tape tracking process, and work the way you feel comfortable....but you also have the DAW to fine-tune stuff when needed, and to provide that extra flexibility. You use it as much or as little as you need.

Imagine you have a great tune going on your 388, and you've used up all your tracks, and you don't want to bounce down any track to make room...but you really need to add a couple of more instruments.
Well....that's where the DAW would let you achieve your production goal. You do most of the tracking to tape, transfer to DAW, and then use the DAW to add those additional elements.

Anyway...just food for thought. You already have experience working with the DAW, so it's simply a matter of combining it with the tape/analog process and using both to get the most out of your gear and your productions. Also, no matter what, you still end up back in the DAW if you want to turn the mixes into file formats for web or CD distribution. Plus, for any kind of post-mix "mastering"....the DAW is the way to go. There are some great mastering-grade plug-ins, that will do a lot more for you than you can do in the analog domain without spending thousands.

 

[lonewhitefly]

sounds good man ... this what it's about -- moving along and recording the songs!

I wouldda just pulled the faders down during the clicks ...

 

[gentlejohn]

Cheers guys! I've decided to keep my towel (ie: I'm not throwing it in!) I'll get this Record button issue addressed then it's "ON WITH THE SHOW!" Speaking from experience, I think at times we can all get a little too .... what's the word?? 'Precious?' I suppose about our creations (and how we go about creating them!) I'm completely 'guilty as charged' of late where this is concerned! It doesn't/shouldn'y really matter how we 'get there' at the end of the day just so long as we 'GET THERE!' (if you know what I'm saying?!) THE MUSIC is (or should be!) the main over-riding thing - that's THE most important bit!

That melody the Postie whistles coming up the garden path. He/she doesn't care how or what it was recorded on or with (unless they're a geek - no offfence folks LOL! ) NO, they're whistling it because it's a hook that's somehow lodged in their head space which they're either consciously or sub-consciously 'paying (playing?) forward'. Sorry, I've done it again and gone into 'naff analogy mode' BUT you know what I'm saying: if 'the music' is good, then 'it's good' [Here Endeth The Lesson!]