I need an opinion on which setup to use...

[chewbacaface]

I have a Tascam 388 in good shape.
I also have two Tascam 238 cassette decks and M-308s as the mixers.
Last, I have a Fostex R8 with a 454 matching mixer (or I could use the M-308 into it).

Here is the dilemma (question). Is there really going to be a huge difference between recording to the 388 or the R8 over the 238. The M-308 is essentially the same mixer (even a bit better) than the one built into the 388. The 238 runs tape at 3.5 ips and the 388 runs at 7.5 ips. However, the 238 uses arguably quieter and much more affordable/attainable tapes. I have probably 10 good reels of 1/4" Maxell 35-90. I have 100 BASF c-60 and another 20 Maxell XLII 90 cassettes.

The easiest answer is to go with the 238 because it is much easier to work with, I have more tracks and I can always find more cassettes. However, has anyone ever compared the two? I just got the 238s and I am wondering if the M-308 paired with the 238 will achieve a similar type warmth that the 388 and R8 get?

Help... I am about to start this project and I wanna get off on the right foot.

Thanks,
Ryan

 

[Beck]

I've used them all at one time or another. Yes, big difference. First off you don’t want to use any of these units without the onboard noise reduction so we can eliminate that as an issue since hiss is virtually imperceptible for all of them with NR on… with dbx coming out slightly ahead in actual Signal-to-Noise, but in real world terms… no big deal.

High bias tape has some advantages, but not so much with those razor thin tracks on the 238. The noise figures on Tascam’s 8-tracks on cassette are as good as their 4-track cassettes. Where narrow tracks will bite you most is with dropouts due to dust particles, hair, etc or inconsistencies in tape oxide distribution. At slower speeds with narrow tracks an eyelash or something can make the music just go away for a split second, which is unacceptable for any serious recording. So you can see the advantages to doubling the track width and the tape speed. Whether widening the tracks or increasing tape speed you’re increasing tape area for a given length of recorded material.

The 238 was a cool little miracle when it came out, but I’ve heard enough severe dropouts on them to avoid them for serious work. Sure you could get away with a problem free recording session, but I wouldn’t count on it to work out with enough consistency to depend on it.

If I were you I’d narrow my choices down to the 388 and R8, and choose the one that’s in the best condition. If they’re both in Smithsonian condition I’d lean toward the 388, but that’s just personal preference. Someone else might prefer the R8. You get a slight advantage with the 15 ips of the R8 vs the 7.5 ips of the 388, but above a certain speed there’s a point of diminishing returns. You get twice as much record time for the same amount of tape on the 388, which will save you in tape costs. And at 7.5 ips with dbx the 388 is capable of fully professional results.

And whatever you do keep more channels around than you have tracks. An 8-channel mixer really isn’t enough for an 8-track recorder. In my studio I can’t have enough channels. I’ve got 24 channels on the main board plus two 8-channel line mixers. So I recommend if you keep the 388 also keep one of the M-308’s. And you might even keep one of the 238’s. One useful purpose for a second less expensive deck is to work out and perfect your parts so you save wear and tear on the main multi-track tape. So for example you get your chops and punch-in points to perfection by rehearsing with the cassette. Then when you’re ready you do the keepers on the 388 or R8, whichever you choose to hang on to.

One last thing... sooner or later the capstan motor is going to freak out and spin out of control on the 238's. It's fixable, but be warned.

 

[chewbacaface]

Thanks Beck! That is definitely good info. I think we'll track into the R8 because it is literally "like new". An interesting side note about this project is that we are consciously trying to get a "crappier/richer" sound. Our last studio album sounded good but it was a little too good. There is no way to push digital tracks the way you can push tape. The results is that nothing gets pushed and it all sounds too clean and glossy. At the end, it sounded like a lot of the bulk trash you hear on the radio. I have an army of microphones but even the best mics don't seem to overcome what I see as digital shortcoming.

We are going to track the drums, bass, and keys on tape this time and do guitars and vocals digitally. This leads me to another question...

Have you done much in the way of hybrid recording before? I'd like to do this because we do a lot of effects and they can be tough to nail down, so, doing them digitally has a huge advantage. The vocals as well can be pretty tough with the harmonies we do and again being able to do takes quickly is a big advantage with digital stuff. Does this seem like a decent approach? In the end it will all be going to vinyl, so are there any ill effects of having some things tracked to tape and some digitally?

Thanks again for your help,
Ryan

 

[trancedental]

Do the drums & bass on the R8 & main guitar parts, keys via MIDI into sequencer synced up with your DAW of choice, vocals & backing guitars / keys in the DAW. The R8 has built in MTC sync from what I remember which should be able to run most DAW's like Pro Tools, Logic Nuendo slaved to MTC / SMPTE code.

 

[briank]

And whatever you do keep more channels around than you have tracks. An 8-channel mixer really isn’t enough for an 8-track recorder. In my studio I can’t have enough channels. I’ve got 24 channels on the main board plus two 8-channel line mixers.

And how! I'm not unknown to whip up a 20+ channel mix off 8-track. Mults and effect returns pile up quick