Favorite 4-track!!!!!!!!

  • Thread starter Thread starter little z
  • Start date Start date

Favorite 4-track

  • Tascam 424 MKII

    Votes: 57 28.8%

  • Tascam 424 MKIII

    Votes: 56 28.3%

  • Tascam 414 MKII

    Votes: 25 12.6%

  • Fostex X-34

    Votes: 5 2.5%

  • Fostex X-18 or is it X-7???

    Votes: 3 1.5%

  • Tascam 488

    Votes: 30 15.2%

  • Tascam porta07

    Votes: 22 11.1%
  • Total voters
    198
424 mk2 and 564

A Reel Person said:
I always wanted to add the 564 to my 'collection' of gear,... [and maybe will, someday]. The 564 is a really sleek digital MD/analog hybrid, being basically a 424mkII design with a digital MD under the hood, and that's cool, because the 424mkII is one of my favorite Portastudio designs. I prefer the digital/analog hybrid over the all-digital designs.

I totally agree with A REEL PERSON..I own (2) 424 mk2's and (2) 564's and I must say that i've gotten quite a few excellent recordings from both machines. Sometimes i will "slave" the 424 mk2 from the 564 or vice versa.
the pre-amps on these machines are of great quality, unlike say a 424 or 464, which has a totally "bad" dark sound, which is even hard to clear up. I get killer analog recordings with my 424 mk2! that's why i own 2 of them in pristine / mint condition. I'd be lost without 'em! Same goes for the 564's, only i get killer digital recording!:D that is to say, along with TDK sa-x, ma-x, Maxell type 2's!...and TDK 140MB MDD!
Click to expand...
 
now that I own one I go for the 244!
I really like the EQ.it misses a bit of the low eq but I mostly cut at 300 Hz while mastering the mix on computer.I bought it for like 80 € and it looks good and some rubber parts got changed.as the head looks good the machine is in very good condition.the only minor issue are sounds of the knobs but I guess that's normal for such an old machine.If I want panning-action I rather take the 688.the 244 is for acoustic,folky stuff.awesome!
 
Of the items on the list, the Porta07 is the only one I've used, and the only one I own that still works. My 244 was a much better machine in it's day, and I would really like to get my hands on a 488 or a 424. I once got a friend of mine to fix a loose connection in the Porta07's power supply. When he brought it back, it was running at 1 7/8 ips rather than 3 3/4 ips. I was kinda pissed off about it, but at least I can play regular 2-track tapes backwards now. :p
 
I love my 424 MkII. Haven't tried any other multitrack cassettes except for a Vestax I had years ago. It didn't have a logic-controlled transport, just plain mechanical switches. My other multitrackers are Fostex MR-8s. They're decent, but they don't really excite me.
 
diggy_dude said:
I had no idea the 424 MkII could be a slave. How do you accomplish that?
Click to expand...

Bumpity bump.

As much time as I spend answering other people's questions on this board, you'd think I could get at least one of my questions answered. You know, to make it worth my while to participate and all. :rolleyes:
 
Dude,...

With all due respecte to Vessel2020, I don't think you can slave the 424mkII.
If it can be done, I'd like to hear how! ;):eek:
 
Hands down the most novel and fun unit of its time was the 488 cassette 4 track recorder with 8 inputs. I kept mine and it enjoys the same TLC as a 57 Chevy in the garage. Classics! Memories that can not be matched today. I still use mine and have it plugged into a Yamaha Remixer and two keyboards so I can capture new thoughts that pop into my head. Simple, fast, easy recording. Though I'm getting ready to put the 488 in a glass display cabinet and lock it up from the kids and get myself a digital workstation with built in mixer/recorder to a harddrive or SD card.
The low end 4 track digital units do not provide enough fun. Who really wants to be serious with this level of unit. If you want a vote on the best current low end 4 channel input unit you'd probably pick the newest Tascam 424 MKIII.
 
My favorite of the two I've used so far is the 424 Mk II. (The other one was an old Vestax.) I'll let you know if my opinion changes when the Yamaha MT4X arrives.

By the way, I'm pretty sure there's no way to slave the 424 Mk II.
 
Okay, I'm gonna have to say the Yamaha has the better designed user interface. It's a dead ringer for the 424 in every other respect, so I can't say one is "better" than the other.
 
Reply to Dave (A Reel Person) & diggy dude

A Reel Person said:
With all due respecte to Vessel2020, I don't think you can slave the 424mkII.
If it can be done, I'd like to hear how! ;):eek:
Click to expand...

I'm sorry Dave,..I didn't "subscribe" to this thread or re-read since I've posted, so I didn't see you and diggy dudes question when asked. I should've been a bit more clear on that. What I meant by "slave" is...I'll hook 'em up via stereo outs (using the mixer section of whatever unit)...and slave one unit from another. Like say,...for example,..I'll run 4 sm57's on a 424mkII mixer section,..and send the stereo outs to 2 tracks on a 564 or vice versa (564 has built-in compression),..with 2 tracks left over for "real time" mixing & recording on the 564 which would be left over for bass, vocals, or guitar. I do a lot of "real time" mixing, instead of going back to a mix to 'fix it'. I like to see what type of results I can get on the first time around, without having to go back and tweak somethin',..but, that's just my preference, and may not be for everyone else. That may not have been the right word for what I do when I record with the portastudios,...but in all actuality one unit is kinda bein' slaved from another. Though, I can understand the confusion,...due to the terminology I used. I'm glad you pointed that out,...because it isn't an actual slave chase....but one unit is still receiving a "flow" from another...so I call it a slave. So, not to be a wise ass,...but yeah, I'd still call it a slave.:D;)
 
diggy_dude said:
Bumpity bump.

As much time as I spend answering other people's questions on this board, you'd think I could get at least one of my questions answered. You know, to make it worth my while to participate and all. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Sorry dude,...I haven't been on this exact thread since I last posted, and must've missed your question.
I work a lot,...so, I don't get to get on here as much as I'd like to.
If you look above, you'll see that I answered you and Dave's question. (it may be 4 months later,..but, at least I answered)...
no, seriously...I didn't see it after I posted in here, or I would have answered.
 
Why is this coming up now? I don't remember what question I asked four months ago, to be honest. I've asked other questions that have been completely ignored since then. :laughings:
 
diggy_dude said:
Why is this coming up now? I don't remember what question I asked four months ago, to be honest. I've asked other questions that have been completely ignored since then. :laughings:
Click to expand...

Because I just saw it now...after 4 months of the original posting.
So,...Instead of being rude, I answered you and Dave's question.
Some of us don't get to get on here 24/7.
I don't think anyone is ignoring your posts intentionally.
I seen threads "revived" from 10 years ago,...is that a bad thing?
 
Oh, I see. I was mainly wondering why that particular post was quoted after all this time. I didn't post on HR at all for three or four months after that, let alone 24/7. And I had long since concluded that the 424 couldn't be slaved to another machine. I'm only here now to answer the OP's question, what is my favorite 4-track? ;)
 
diggy_dude said:
Oh, I see. I was mainly wondering why that particular post was quoted after all this time. I didn't post on HR at all for three or four months after that, let alone 24/7. And I had long since concluded that the 424 couldn't be slaved to another machine. I'm only here now to answer the OP's question, what is my favorite 4-track? ;)
Click to expand...

No problem, I just wanted to clarify what I meant by "slaving" the 424mkII from the 564 or vice versa. Sometimes I even use my 488 mkII just for its phantom powered inputs, and then "slave" a 424 mkII from the 488 mkII for recording.
Why would do that, and not just use the 488 mkII to record? Well, the 488 only records at high speed, but the 424 mkII has a normal & high speed option, so if I want to, I can listen back in a mixdown deck or stereo deck without having to mixdown.. by using the "normal" speed position.
Though I do use my 488 mkII for recording as well, but that is not a 4 track (even though it only records 4 tracks simultaneously).. it's an 8 track.;)
 
I think you're talking about chaining the buses. All of my TEAC and Tascam mixers have jacks for that. I could put 38 additional channels into the 424 by chaining them through the buss inputs if I wanted to. (M-09 -> M-06 -> Model 1 -> MM-1 -> 424) I bet it would be awfully noisy though! :eek:

By "slaving", we mean one machine chases the FSK or SMPTE track on another machine.
 
I think you're talking about chaining the buses. All of my TEAC and Tascam mixers have jacks for that. I could put 38 additional channels into the 424 by chaining them through the buss inputs if I wanted to. (M-09 -> M-06 -> Model 1 -> MM-1 -> 424) I bet it would be awfully noisy though! :eek:

By "slaving", we mean one machine chases the FSK or SMPTE track on another machine.
 
VESSEL2020 said:
Though, I can understand the confusion,...due to the terminology I used. I'm glad you pointed that out,...because it isn't an actual slave chase....but one unit is still receiving a "flow" from another...so I call it a slave. So, not to be a wise ass,...but yeah, I'd still call it a slave.:D;)
Click to expand...

.............................................;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top