Digitizing 4 track tapes with a different model than the original recording model

neckcarpenter

New member
Hello! This here's my first post after a few months of lurking on this wonderful forum. I'm embarrassed to be so needy right off the bat, but also feel like I'm in good company!

Here's the situation:
I have a bunch (50+) of old four track tapes that were recorded 15-20 years ago with a Tascam Portastudio 414 mkII, and
am in the market for a four track to digitize this stack.

I'm leaning towards a Tascam 424 mkIII, but wonder if there's any issue with using a different machine to digitize than what I used to record. In this case it would be a kinda similar, but newer model.

If the answer to that is a "no", then my question becomes more general. Is there anything I should be looking out for while shopping for a four track that'll be used exclusively to digitize existing tapes? One that's particularly well-regarded for its output options, it's great EQ, for instance?

Thanks a bunch, and I look forward to more exploring in these vast forums!
 
Greetings!

Assuming your tapes were recorded at “high speed” (i.e. 3 3/4ips), and using dbx noise reduction, those really are the only two main features you want to ensure the machine you purchase possess. Outside of that literally ANY Teac/Tascam 4-track cassette multitrack machine should reproduce your tapes...they all have identical track spacing.

If you are transferring the tracks, I would also recommend you purchase a machine that has discrete output jacks for each tape track. That, as long as your digital audio interface has at least 4 simultaneous inputs, will allow you to transfer all 4 tracks simultaneously. That will limit your list of machines somewhat. The 424 series is a good option as they are the newest of the Tascam 4-track cassette Portastudios, and potentially less likely to have issues. The mkII and mkIII both have individual tape track outputs. The mkII is my personal favorite as it has an onboard power supply, and all the features I’ve ever needed.

Other brands (such as Fostex and Yamaha) may be suitable, but I can’t verify the track spacing.
 
Thanks for the info, sweetbeats!
I'll continue to narrow my search to Teac/Tascam "high speed" with dbx.

As far as output to digital...I don't hate the idea of sending my live mix from stereo outs into stereo ins. I understand that really limits what I can do with the files once I'm working on them in garageband, but again, I don't hate it. It's what we did back in the day, mixing to another cassette! This isn't in order to increase my options of machines to buy. I'd say it's more of a...creative decision?

Is this silly? Perhaps I should see if there's a thread on here dealing with that. Maybe others have done it that way and then had regrets...
 
It all depends on whether you want to use the DAW as a master recorder, or as an extension of the multitrack master. Either is commonly utilized, and it sounds like you are open to either. What I will say is, generally, a 4-track cassette "Portastudio" that does *not* have the individual tape outputs is generally closer to the budget end of the spectrum, and there may be other limits on the feature set. Again, IMO, the best balance of having no worries about tape head compatability, dbx noise reduction, high speed transport, lower price and more recent build/lower likelihood of problems/repairs needed, the 424mkII or mkIII is your best bet. They are commonly found as are parts and support for them, have a nice feature set and meet your expressed goal in terms of that feature set.

I also sent you a PM in case you didn't see that.
 
If you can find a portastudio with 4 outs that really is the way to fly. I spent 10 years looking for a way to be able to get 8 tracks at a time out of my 8 track Tascam 488 mk1 which only had 4 outs and when I eventually worked out a way to do it I was dancing in the street.
But Martha and the Vandellas wouldn't dance with me !
Getting all the tracks running individually simultaneously is a no brainer if you can do it and there's no reason to stop you doing so. I'm reminded of the slogan of an old washing up liquid from the 70s when I was a kid ~ "why make work for yourself ?"
 
Thanks for your perspective, grimtraveller! My worry is that sending out all the tracks individually will add to the amount of fussing and fretting over each one when I'm working on them digitally. These are tunes that I'd rather be done with quickly. Maybe I'm showing how inexperienced I am here, or that I don't value the tunes very much.
I just got done working on an all-digital album, so I guess I'm wary of diving back in to each. little. nuance. of. every. track.
 
My worry is that sending out all the tracks individually will add to the amount of fussing and fretting over each one when I'm working on them digitally. These are tunes that I'd rather be done with quickly
I can dig that. When I sent out my tracks {and there had been much bouncing and track sharing on the 8 tracks} it was tempting to cut or boost on the way in but for the most part I just sent them as they were. Once into my Akai 12 track I did very little on any tracks as the work had already been done when they were on the portastudio. I had put off mixing them for so many years but I really disciplined myself and in the space of a few months had mixed 75 of them. And many of these were long pieces {22 mins, 36 mins, 16 mins etc}. I encourage you to still send them out individually ~ it's actually down to you how much you fuss and fret over them.
My watchword is one I picked up in an interesting debate that went on for months some years ago on a Reaper forum ~ ironic because I don't use Reaper and don't feel any desire to go the computer route. Anyway, the watchword was "finished is better than perfect."
 
Haha, totally agree with "finished is better than perfect"

And, yeah, I'd be the only one making me obsess over the details! I'll give the individual-track-output a shot.
 
I recently bought a used 424 for about $200 (in great condition) so I could transfer my old cassettes that were recorded on my old Fostex X15. I bought it for its four discreet outputs. I didn’t want to simply mix down to stereo because that would force me to start mixing now, which I don’t have time. On many of the tapes, there could be a background vocal and a lead guitar on the same track. Of course the Guitar is blasting loud.so, on all of these tracks that could have multiple instruments at different points of the song, I would need to remember to lower it during the solo, raise it to the correct level when the vocal is back or at times, lower to 0 in the case of a pre-bounced track would pop back in. This would cause me to re-learn everything that is going on.

I have far more control over the mix in my daw later. I can correct my levels, separate multiple instruments on a single track to their own tracks, cut out sections of other noise that shouldn’t be there. I love going back to older multi tracks and replacing my God awful distorted drum machine or synth and replacing them so they are far more listenable. It gives me a second chance to fix old recording and mixing mistakes.
 
If you’ve got at least six inputs, you could have both. Record the stereo live mix to use now, but also make a digital archive of the individual tracks in case you or somebody else wants to mess with it later.
 
I currently have an audio interface with only two inputs, embarrassing, I know.
After some not insignificant time pricing out four input interfaces, and after rereading your comment, maybe now I want one with SIX!

Gah, this was all so simple when I imagined it a couple months ago! I'd play the tapes, they'd sound amazing after a few tweaks, pop it into garageband, boom, new album "from the archives" this summer.
 
Honestly if this is the only reason you might want to record 6 inputs at a time, and you’re only even thinking that because people here encouraged you to archive the individual tracks but you don’t really expect to want to remix again any time soon, then I’m not sure it’s worth buying a big interface just for that. Do the live mix off the machine like you originally intended and move on with your life. Maybe down the road you’ll find other/better reasons to record several inputs at once, then you’ll buy the interface, and then you could do the multitrack archiving.

That said, you can get a used Tascam US1604 or US1800 for less than some 2 channel interfaces new. It’d be way more inputs than you need, but then you’re ready if the need ever arises to track like a whole band at once.
 
Back
Top